[ CC'ed #758234 as Stuart's questions are also related to that. ]
Stuart Prescott writes:
>> Gerrit Pape writes:
>>> Since discussion on this topic seems to have stopped, I suggest this
>>> patch to remove the priority "extra" for Debian packages.
>>>
>>> All packages that currently are of prior
Hi Ansgar,
Thanks for your input here -- it would be great if in this process we could
remove a pile of busywork from the ftp-master task as well as simplify one
of the strangest features of the archive.
> Gerrit Pape writes:
>> Since discussion on this topic seems to have stopped, I suggest t
Hi,
Charles Plessy wrote:
> Ansgar, you have written that you find the priority “extra” useful in some
> situations, but for me it is not clear if the uses cases are for human
> readability, or if it is to rely on that priority in automated processes.
> Could you give us details ? There is proba
Hello everybody,
I would also support the suppression of the priority “extra” – which never
brought concrete benefits in my experience in the Debian Med team – but the
situation as of today is that this suppression is opposed by a member of the
FTP master team, and since this is the team that woul
Hi,
Russ Allbery writes:
> Gerrit Pape writes:
>> and helps us to keep control over the size of required and important.
>
> This is a different issue. You want oversight over what goes into
> required and important. I can certainly see why you want this.
I don't think it helps too much to con
Johannes Schauer wrote:
> Quoting Jonathan Nieder (2014-08-25 20:35:34)
>> Johannes Schauer wrote:
>>> When bootstrapping, a common approach is to do a build without
>>> documentation to be able to drop the build dependencies on documentation
>>> building tools. This is why the build profile name
Hi,
Quoting Jonathan Nieder (2014-08-25 20:35:34)
> > When bootstrapping, a common approach is to do a build without
> > documentation to be able to drop the build dependencies on documentation
> > building tools. This is why the build profile name "nodoc" exists which, if
> > enabled, allows buil
Hi,
Johannes Schauer wrote:
> please consider adding "nodoc" as a possible DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS value to
> § 4.9.1 [1].
[...]
> When bootstrapping, a common approach is to do a build without documentation
> to
> be able to drop the build dependencies on documentation building tools. This
> is
> wh
Gerrit Pape writes:
> Since discussion on this topic seems to have stopped, I suggest this
> patch to remove the priority "extra" for Debian packages.
>
> All packages that currently are of priority "extra" shall be changed to
> priority "optional" for the reasons outlined in message #35 to this
>
Processing control commands:
> retitle -1 debian-policy: allow packages to depend on packages of lower
> priority
Bug #758234 [debian-policy] Remove priority "extra", make all corresponding
packages priority "optional"
Changed Bug title to 'debian-policy: allow packages to depend on packages of
Control: retitle -1 debian-policy: allow packages to depend on packages of
lower priority
Control: clone -1 -2
Control: retitle -2 Remove priority "extra", make all corresponding packages
priority "optional"
Gerrit Pape writes:
> Since discussion on this topic seems to have stopped, I suggest t
Hi,
Gerrit Pape wrote:
> --- a/policy.sgml
> +++ b/policy.sgml
> @@ -852,17 +852,7 @@ zope.
> install if you didn't know what it was and don't have
> specialized requirements. This is a much larger system
> and includes the X Window System, a full TeX
> -
All packages that currently are of priority "extra" shall be changed to
priority "optional" for the reasons outlined in message #35 to this
report
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=758234#35
If technically feasible, and I think so, the transition shall be done
through ftpmaster's
On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 03:17:14PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> As I understand it, your primary concern is around the decision-making
> process for handling changes to priority (particularly increasing
> priority).
It's not necessarily the decision-making process. Actually I didn't
look in detai
14 matches
Mail list logo
