Jonathan Nieder writes:
> It still sounds like work, so let's abandon that part of the proposal.
> Maybe we can prepare for it with the following, though?
> @@ -757,16 +757,11 @@
>
> required
>
> - Packages which are necessary for the proper
> -
Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 01:20:19PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder a écrit :
>> Charles Plessy wrote:
>>> deprecating
>>> either the required or important priority would not render packages buggy
>>> just
>>> for that
Le Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 01:20:19PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder a écrit :
> Charles Plessy wrote:
>
> > Given that the Priority field in the debian source control file is used only
> > once, when the package is first uploaded to the Debian archive, deprecating
> > either the required or important priori
Charles Plessy wrote:
> Given that the Priority field in the debian source control file is used only
> once, when the package is first uploaded to the Debian archive, deprecating
> either the required or important priority would not render packages buggy just
> for that fact.
Are you referring to
Le Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 07:52:05PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder a écrit :
>
> In practice, my impression is that "required" usually just means
> pseudo-essential (that is, essential packages and their transitive
> dependencies). Is that impression correct? Would it be worth
> documenting?
>
> A part
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1,SHA512
On 07/09/12 09:41, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> The proposal is to amend that second bullet point:
>
> |* Support the command-line option "-e ...",
> which | creates a new terminal window and runs the specified
> command. | The argum
Le Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 11:40:40AM +0200, Guus Sliepen a écrit :
>
> Attached is a patch against the developers-reference source. It can
> probably be improved, any comments are welcome.
Dear Guus,
thank you for your patch. Here are a few comments.
> diff --git a/beyond-pkging.dbk b/beyond-pkg
7 matches
Mail list logo
