Bug#89038: mime policy copying update-mime(8)

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011, Russ Allbery wrote: > The bug: > > http://bugs.debian.org/89038 > > is still looking for two more seconds. This would allow us to retire the > tiny separate mime-policy document. Could other folks take a look and > confirm that all looks well? Seconded. It's fine for m

Bug#504880: Disambiguate "installed" for packages

Raphael Hertzog writes: > On Fri, 04 Mar 2011, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> ) I suspect others like it, too, but who knows? Patch attached. >> Seconds or objections welcome. > Seconded. It's long and I might have missed some inaccuracies but I think > it's an improvement in clarity. Thanks! Wit

Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 504880 ...

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '

Time for 3.9.2?

Hello everyone, It's been a very long time since 3.9.1, and we've accumulated a pile of stuff in the Git repository. There are still tons of bugs that need more review, more proposals we could get closure on, and so forth, but if I keep waiting for everything to be perfect, I'm never going to upl

Bug#89038: mime policy copying update-mime(8)

The bug: http://bugs.debian.org/89038 is still looking for two more seconds. This would allow us to retire the tiny separate mime-policy document. Could other folks take a look and confirm that all looks well? We separately should really include more documentation of this subsystem, but th

Bug#515837: add "Applications/Window Management" to menu sub-policy

This bug: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=515837 still needs a review from another Debian Developer to be applied. Could someone take a look? (Bill, in particular, if you have an opinion?) -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) -

Bug#599944: [PATCH] Add a reminder of Pre-Depends policy to §7.2 "Binary Dependencies"

Jonathan Nieder writes: > Section 3.5 says: > You should not specify a Pre-Depends entry for a package before this > has been discussed on the debian-devel mailing list and a consensus > about doing that has been reached. > Add a reminder of this to section 7.2, where the semantics of > Pre-

Bug#606869: debian-policy: Please fix freedesktop.org links

David Prévot writes: > freedesktop.org URL in the Policy are moved permanently. The following > patch solve this issue. Thanks, applied. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a s

Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 599944 ...

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '

Bug#619275: Perl Policy change to document major version upgrade trigger

Dominic Hargreaves writes: > From: Dominic Hargreaves > Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 16:11:29 + > Subject: [PATCH] Describe the Perl upgrade trigger > Signed-off-by: Dominic Hargreaves > --- > perl-policy.sgml | 20 > 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > d

Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 606869 ...

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '

Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy ...

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '

Bug#620566: dpkg: "version number does not start with digit" is in contrast to policy

Russ Allbery (03/04/2011): > I'm not a fan of having DAK reject things that Policy says are > allowed. Neither am I. > I think we should either allow it or not allow it, but Policy and > DAK should agree. Yes, pretty please. KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Bug#618013: debian-policy: please clarify where multi-line fields are allowed in control files

Ansgar Burchardt writes: > I will also close #526713 and #533495 once your suggested patch has been > applied to the policy as all user-defined fields and fields not defined > in policy (such as Vcs-*) will always be `simple' fields for which > folding is not allowed. Please correct me if I am w

Bug#609162: debian-policy: package names with dots/periods ('.') and crontab files: packagers beware

"Karl E. Jorgensen" writes: > Can do. are two sentences in secion 9.5 which will need to be changed. > The 2nd sentence in 9.5, which currently reads: > If a package wants to install a job that has to be executed via > cron, it should place a file with the name of the package in one >

Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy ..., usertagging 609162 ...

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '

Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy ..., usertagging 618013 ...

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '

Bug#616465: debian-policy: description file in each system directory

sergey writes: > What do you think about placing README in each system directory? > IMHO it make system exploration more interesting for new users and can > be helpful for expirienced users too. > Now Debian 6 already contain READMEs in some system directories: > /etc/init.d/README, > /etc/grub

Bug#620566: dpkg: "version number does not start with digit" is in contrast to policy

Michael Prokop writes: > Yeah, actually the change is breaking existing packages which used to > work just fine (disclaimer: no, the ones I'm talking about aren't > available in the official Debian pool). > I understand the change but a timeframe for upgrading would be nice with > warnings inste

Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy ..., tagging 616465 ...

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '

Bug#620566: dpkg: "version number does not start with digit" is in contrast to policy

Julien Cristau writes: > On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 05:03:47 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: >> Well, while I generally agree dpkg does not need to be as strict as >> policy when it might make sense to be laxer outside Debian, in this >> case I don't see the point in allowing the version to start with a

Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy ..., usertagging 528453

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '

Bug#616457: debian-policy: always write version of Debian in documentation at the beginning

sergey writes: > Excuse me for my bad English :-) > It is like bad tradition now: many documentation do not contain > information about Debian version. It is very strange for me. How can be > authors 100% sure that their documentation is absolutely correct for all > Debian versions, from 1.1 or

Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 616457 ...

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '

Bug#619186: Fix multiarch FHS exception for i386 in light of recent discussions

Steve Langasek writes: > Attached is a patch to update policy's FHS exception to reflect the > current consensus among the gcc, eglibc, and dpkg maintainers around the > paths to use for implementation and the interface packages should use to > query these paths. Thanks, applied. -- Russ Allbe

Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, severity of 374029 is normal ...

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '

Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 616462 ...

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '

Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, tagging 619186

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '

Bug#548867: Proposed patch to update Debian Developer's Duties chapter

> What else do you think we can learn from this exchange? To not finger-point in blogs. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110403233036.ga19...@merve

Processed: tagging 620566

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 620566 - sid Bug #620566 [debian-policy] Sync upstream version format with what dpkg accepts now Removed tag(s) sid. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 620566: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bug

Bug#620566: dpkg: "version number does not start with digit" is in contrast to policy

* Julien Cristau [Son Apr 03, 2011 at 10:16:47 +0200]: > On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 05:03:47 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > On Sat, 2011-04-02 at 21:28:08 +0200, Christian Hofstaedtler wrote: > > > dpkg 1.16.0 appears to refuse to install packages which have a Version: > > > field which does not sta

Bug#620566: dpkg: "version number does not start with digit" is in contrast to policy

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA384 Guillem Jover dixit… > : ~ (full stop, plus, hyphen, colon, > - tilde) and should start with a digit. If there is no > + tilde) and must start with a digit. If there is no > debian_revisi

Bug#620686: document how to deal with technically negligent developers

Package: developers-reference Version: 3.4.4 Severity: normal There is a recurrent unpleasant topic on various Debian lists. From time to time, we read complaints that specific maintainers are not fit to be Debian Developers (anymore) because, allegedly, they are not doing job at maintaining one o

Bug#548867: Proposed patch to update Debian Developer's Duties chapter

On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 08:42:45AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > in a private discussion, you asked me more feedback about the changes > you proposed. I waited before answering, because I wanted to read more > comments from others, and my mistake was probably to not notify you > that I was waiting

Bug#620566: dpkg: "version number does not start with digit" is in contrast to policy

Full quoting because you didn't cc the policy list when reassigning... On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 05:03:47 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > reassign 620566 debian-policy > severity 620566 normal > tags 620566 patch > retitle 620566 Sync upstream version format with what dpkg accepts now > thanks > > O