Bug#671507: debian-policy: policy section 7.4 conflicts with section 10.1

2012-05-04 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 10:27:27AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > Patrick Ouellette writes: > > > Policy 7.4 states > > > "Neither Breaks nor Conflicts should be used unless two packages cannot > > be installed at the same time or installing them both cau

Bug#671507: debian-policy: policy section 7.4 conflicts with section 10.1

2012-05-04 Thread Patrick Ouellette
Package: debian-policy Severity: normal Policy 7.4 states "Neither Breaks nor Conflicts should be used unless two packages cannot be installed at the same time or installing them both causes one of them to be broken or unusable. Having similar functionality or performing the same tasks as anot

Re: Request for policy interpretation: procedure and possible outcomes for naming conflicts

2012-05-03 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 11:51:30AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > > IMHO, /usr/bin/node is much too generic a name to be in any package. > Too generic or not, /usr/sbin/node has been in Debian since at least 1999 (13 or so years now). I'm also sure there are many other projects using similarly

Re: Request for policy interpretation: procedure and possible outcomes for naming conflicts

2012-05-02 Thread Patrick Ouellette
Jonathan has left out a bit of history here. please review the following bug reports while thinking about the issue: http://bugs.debian.org/597571 http://bugs.debian.org/611698 http://bugs.debian.org/614907 These show evidence the people involved may not especially be of a mind to comply with po

RE: libc6_2.0.7 release notes...

1998-06-25 Thread Patrick Ouellette
> Patrick> I found no mention in the web site's policy manual of > Patrick> version numbering. > > That is because t is in the packaging manual. Debian Policy > Manual is a little bit of a misnomer in that policy is actually > spread over a number of authoritative documents; the packagi

RE: libc6_2.0.7 release notes...

1998-06-25 Thread Patrick Ouellette
I found no mention in the web site's policy manual of version numbering. Since it has made the transition to the policy list, I am advocating reviewing the policy (in the packaging manual) for possible changes to solve future problems caused by the packaging of pre-release upstream versions. If p

RE: libc6_2.0.7 release notes...

1998-06-25 Thread Patrick Ouellette
OOPS left should be right. One of these days I'll be able to tell my left and right apart! > -Original Message- > From: Patrick Ouellette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, June 25, 1998 3:13 PM > To: debian-policy@lists.debian.org > Cc: Debian Deve

RE: libc6_2.0.7 release notes...

1998-06-25 Thread Patrick Ouellette
I think a reasonable policy statement for this would be something like: All pre-release versions will have debian revision of -0.x Maintainer release revisions will start at -1 and increment in whole numbers Non maintainer releases will add a point version to the left of the maintainer release