Hi,
On Mon, 18 May 2020, Holger Levsen wrote:
> I'd like to update the copyright statements in d/changelog and and
> source/index.rst and bring them in sync as well. Thus I have prepared
> the following diff.
>
> I'd appreciate a quick review and possible corrections from you!
Fine for me.
Chee
Hi,
On Mon, 08 Apr 2019, Sean Whitton wrote:
> I am considering to working to convert dev-ref to rST+Sphinx this
> summer. I would like to start a discussion about doing that. The
> main things that I need to learn from this discussion are:
I just want to point out that contrary to the Debian p
Hi,
On Mon, 27 Aug 2018, Sean Whitton wrote:
> On Mon 27 Aug 2018 at 12:58PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > Or you could have read dh_linktree's manual page and see that you can
> > use "replace" instead of "deduplicate" to get a weak dependency.
>
Hi,
On Sat, 25 Aug 2018, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Urgh.
>
> I am reluctantly (yet gratefully!) working on implementing Ian's
> substvar hack.
Or you could have read dh_linktree's manual page and see that you can
use "replace" instead of "deduplicate" to get a weak dependency.
$ git diff
diff -
Hi,
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Perl folks, the short version is that Lintian wasn't actually checking for
> scripts that used /usr/bin/env perl, so our check when we closed #683495
> was bogus. Lintian has now changed based on Policy, and it looks like
> there were around 2,000 sc
Hello,
On Fri, 04 Aug 2017, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> So I have been wondering several times whether we should move the
> maintainer information elsewhere. For example, tracker.d.o could be
> extended to record maintainer information. It could also understand
> the concept of "teams" listing tea
Hello Russ,
On Sun, 30 Apr 2017, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Thanks to a ton of hard work by Guillem, finishing up the work that Osamu
> Aoki started, debian-policy Git head is now DocBook. It's currently using
> xsltproc and dblatex to generate its output (and my plan is to proceed
> with that for the
On Sat, 31 Dec 2016, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Looks reasonable to me. Seconded.
Seconded.
>
> > diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
> > index 404dc73..421e0d1 100644
> > --- a/policy.sgml
> > +++ b/policy.sgml
> > @@ -10699,6 +10699,18 @@ END-INFO-DIR-ENTRY
> >
> >
> >
> > + If
On Sat, 31 Dec 2016, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > The list and descriptions:
>
> > virtual-mysql-client - A MySQL database compatible client package
> > virtual-mysql-client-core- A MySQL database compatible client core
> > package
> > virtual-mysql-server - A MySQL database compat
On Sat, 31 Dec 2016, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >>[…]
> >>
> >>The first paragraph of the control file contains information about the
> >>source package in general. The subsequent sets each describe a binary
> >>package that the source tree builds. All the binary packages have a
> >>corresponding paragr
On Sat, 31 Dec 2016, Russ Allbery wrote:
> These all look good to me. Seconded (and quoted below for the convenience
> of others who may want to review and second).
Seconded.
>
> > From 0bc030c417adfa7ca50944c918101dd9ce62bebb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Guillem Jover
> > Date: Fri, 24
On Sun, 12 Jun 2016, Hideki Yamane wrote:
> And, policy maintainers, could you give me a permission to release it
> as 3.4.18, please? If none of you would say any objection for some days,
> I'll add me as Uploaders and upload it.
I don't think you need any extra permission for this. The
develo
On Mon, 07 Mar 2016, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> Though shouldn't this be worded a bit more generic? There are also
> /lib32 vs /usr/lib32 and /lib64 vs /usr/lib64 (and possibly other
> suffixes like libx32).
>
> Also I don't think Policy should require maintainer scripts for the
> implementation of
On Sat, 05 Mar 2016, Bill Allombert wrote:
> So to recap, Marco proposal is
>
> diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
> index 404dc73..74f0a3b 100644
> --- a/policy.sgml
> +++ b/policy.sgml
> @@ -8508,6 +8508,21 @@ fi
> renamed. If a consensus cannot be reached, both
> programs m
On Thu, 10 Sep 2015, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> No, we should stop filing O bugs. Instead we have just come up with a
> nice definition of an orphaned package, it's called the
> no-human-maintainer lintian tag:
> https://lintian.debian.org/tags/no-human-maintainers.
Sorry, th
Hi,
On Thu, 10 Sep 2015, Charles Plessy wrote:
> if I remember well, this policy was set because some developers were
> (rightfully in my opinion) annoyed when the Maintainer field is a moderated
> mailing list and there is no Uploader field.
I don't think that this requirement makes sense. They
Hi,
On Thu, 24 Jul 2014, Charles Plessy wrote:
> PS: for dep.debian.net, I am stuck with the fact that there does not seem to
> be
> an appropriate place for whole-DD-writable ikiwiki websites in Debian, and I
Can you remember us why alioth is no longer suitable ?
AFAIK it still has everything
Hi,
On Tue, 08 Jul 2014, Steve Langasek wrote:
> If we're going to have this in collab-maint, I think it's probably important
> to ensure that git commits are announced on debian-policy. Could someone
> set this up?
Done.
On Tue, 08 Jul 2014, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Personnaly, I would prefer i
Hi,
On Thu, 03 Jul 2014, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> An easy improvement is to switch to Git and collab-maint, and to
> announce that direct commits of consensual changes are OK.
> After that, we could call for help.
> Raphael, Marc, are you fine with that?
Yes.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian
(adding debian-doc to the cc)
Hi,
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Paul Wise wrote:
> Some of you may be aware there has been a discussion about devref on
> debian-private and debian-project, the threads started here:
>
> <20140613131135.ga7...@x61s.reliablesolutions.de>
> https://lists.debian.org/201406181
Control: retitle -1 Replace section about goodies for developers with pointer
to wiki page
Control: tags -1 - patch
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014, Jan Niehusmann wrote:
> More information is available at
> https://wiki.debian.org/MemberBenefits
>
> I think section 4.13.2 (or even the whole section 4.13) s
On Tue, 11 Feb 2014, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> At the Security team sprint meeting in Essen we concluded that working
> trough the request tracker does not fit well with our workflows when
> handling issues. We would thus like to change the paragraph on how to
> contact the security-team in the
On Mon, 06 Jan 2014, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Ian Jackson writes:
>
> > This is all very well but I think de jure they aren't a delegated team,
> > and the distinction is defined in the constitution. This is not
> > trivially bypassable, because a delegated team is one who derives their
> > powers
On Mon, 04 Nov 2013, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Such policy change should have been proposed before --commit was implemented.
> dpkg is supposed to follow policy not the other way round.
No, the policy doesn't dictate everything top-down. Large part of it are
built on top of existing practices that i
On Tue, 29 Oct 2013, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > In general, when using source format 3.0 (quilt) or later, running
> > `dpkg-source -x' on a source package will produce the source of
> > the package, ready for editing. This will allow one to make
> > changes and run `dpkg-buildpackage
Hi,
On Fri, 23 Aug 2013, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I think this is starting to convince me that this means I should be
> using a different kind of field name. This isn't really suitable. In
> particular, it shouldn't interact with any deliberate setting of Vcs-*
> by the maintainer.
Yes, "Dgit-Commi
On Mon, 22 Jul 2013, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Nevertheless, please let me try to refocus on the question of whether
> the Policy can be updated or not.
I believe we can update the policy whatever the status of this specific
bug.
> Here is what is written in the Policy about "postinst configure":
>
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Can you explain what the bug is and what the correction will be ? Because I
The bug is that triggers are run while the dependencies of the triggered
package are not satisfied. The fix is not to do that and wait until those
dependencies are satisfied (b
Hi,
On Thu, 18 Jul 2013, Charles Plessy wrote:
> After reading #671711 and /usr/share/doc/dpkg-dev/triggers.txt.gz, my
> impression is that a package can not become "Unpacked" and keep a list of
> pending triggers, because of the following statements in triggers.txt:
>
> 1) Pending triggers are
On Thu, 18 Jul 2013, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 08:55:20AM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit :
> >
> > regarding “noawait” triggers, the patch already contains the following,
> > which
> > is new and improved compared to the existing documentation.
> >
> > The *-noawait dire
Hi,
On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Charles Plessy wrote:
> About the problem of triggers being called with Depends not satisfied, can you
> give more explanations or suggest some text for the warning ? Would it be
> enough to add a notice that the triggered postinst script may be called when
> the package
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> In #685646 the advise for versioning for {stable,testing}{,-security}
> uploads was adjusted. In [1] there is a missing bit for it refering to
> the older convention +codename1. I tried to address this change in
> attached patch.
Thanks, applied.
Hi,
On Thu, 16 May 2013, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Guillem recently posted on debian-devel about "noawait" triggers, and I would
> like to send a link to the patch to the Policy once it gets futher
> proof-reading and seconds. Or if it takes time, shall I point to this bug log
> on -devel ?
I don'
(Your last mail was not sent to the BTS but to the ML directly)
On Tue, 14 May 2013, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> I didn't mean to imply someone other than the relevant UI maintainers
> would need to write code for this to happen; we could simply add some
> wording along the lines of
>
> packages t
Hi,
On Sun, 12 May 2013, Charles Plessy wrote:
>
> The *-noawait directives should be used unless the
> packages awaiting triggers can not satisfy Depends
> relationships until the triggers have been processed.
> In that case, the inter
Hi Charles,
On Sat, 11 May 2013, Charles Plessy wrote:
> I think that I took care of all of your comments.
>
> Here is an updated patch. Among the changes, it introduces
> sub-section to make the information easier to digest.
Thank you for the work! I have a few fixes and suggestions but otherw
Hello,
On Thu, 18 Apr 2013, Tobias Wolter wrote:
> there's an outdated hyperlink in
> http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/best-pkging-practices.html#helper-scripts
>
> pointing to
> http://arch.debian.org/arch/private/srivasta/
> which does not exists anymore.
Thanks, I drop
On Wed, 10 Apr 2013, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog writes:
> > On Fri, 15 Mar 2013, Charles Plessy wrote:
>
> >> +Dpkg defines the folowing states for the packages.
> >> +
> >> + Not-Installed
>
> > I would use the pr
Hi Charles,
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013, Charles Plessy wrote:
> I am still seeking comments for the attached patch, that describes Dpkg
> triggers.
Here are my comments. There's quite a bit of work left.
> >From 6a7fd0e49cb8dbd025771feb95c2dcafb408c1b8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Charles Plessy
>
Hi,
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013, Guillem Jover wrote:
> It should work way better than before, in part thanks the to the usage
> and bug reporting from MIT, but as you say there's still some wrinkles,
> which I plan on fixing for 1.17.x; in any case I'm always interested in
> any bug reports affecting the
Control: tag -1 pending
On Mon, 17 Sep 2012, Paul Wise wrote:
> I didn't see the comments from Charles Plessy as I wasn't subscribed to
> the bug and he did not CC me. I've attached a new version adopting his
> suggestions.
Patch applied with some tweaks (suggestion of David and also reformulatio
Hi,
On Sun, 12 Aug 2012, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I'm looking for seconds so that we can finally merge this monster.
> Presented as a diff since that was the request last time, but the branch
> has also been pushed to the Policy Git repository, so if you want to
> review it various other ways, you ca
On Thu, 12 Jul 2012, Russ Allbery wrote:
> HOWEVER, I think putting those files in a clear place on the file system
> so that they can be easily read via a pager by the end user without using
> dpkg-query commands is not only mandatory for the transition period but
> mandatory permanently. I would
On Thu, 12 Jul 2012, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
>Hi,
>
> * Raphaël Hertzog [2012-07-12 08:46:03 CEST]:
> > Both the changelog and the copyright files are stored with a package's
> > normal data (within data.tar in the .deb) but they are really package
> > metadata (that should be part of control.t
Hi,
On Sat, 07 Jul 2012, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > On the typograhy side, it is very minor, but since you added a bullet point
> > to
> > the list in 5.13.2, you can make the now previous bullet point finish by a
> > semicolon (see below), and the last bullet point finishing by a dot.
>
> So, how a
Hi,
On Mon, 25 Jun 2012, Russ Allbery wrote:
> The 15th Edition was published in 2003. Since then, my personal
> impression is that opposition to generic "he" has hardened considerably
> and opposition to singular "they" has weakened somewhat. Using "he" as a
> generic pronoun for a person of in
On Tue, 26 Jun 2012, Charles Plessy wrote:
> before it is too late. I also would like to add that it is a bit of a
> slippery
> slope to use "seconded" statements as votes instead of indications that the
> discussion has ended on a conclusion, as it is done with the Policy, where
> this
> method
Hi,
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Attached is a corrected patch, which fixes the verb agreement issue above
> and makes a few other tweaks (e.g., not introducing passive tense where it's
> not needed, which is worse than the original problem it aims to fix), and
> also catches a few
Hi,
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012, Per Andersson wrote:
> See attached patch for clarification of removals from testing.
Thanks, applied.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer
Get the Debian Administrator's Handbook:
→ http://debian-handbook.info/get/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy
Hi,
On Sat, 09 Jun 2012, David Prévot wrote:
> Developpers-reference maintainers, do you want to address any more issue
> before actually uploading the package? If not, I'll poke translators as
> soon as I get an ACK from any of you, or within five days if I don't get
> a NACK.
I have not planned
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> No, that's not correct. If a package is already installed but a newever
> version is available, then this will be upgraded if the priority is 1.
> It just won't be selected for installation automatically.
>
> This is how experimental works: packages in
On Sun, 26 Feb 2012, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Part of the goal of waiting until we were in release freeze was precisely
> so that it was clear that people shouldn't target wheezy with updates for
> this version of Policy. Maybe we should make that explicit by declining
> to release the new version in
On Sun, 26 Feb 2012, Russ Allbery wrote:
> This is an attempt to be bold. We'll see if it actually survives contact
> with reality. :)
Great, thank you for this!
> Then, my plan is to declare a Policy freeze on May 1st. Hopefully by that
> point we'll be into release freeze as well. I then wa
On Tue, 21 Feb 2012, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 07:09:40PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 06:02:50PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > Debian is used on small systems where users still like to have
> > > documentation, and
> > > support zlib compre
On Mon, 30 Jan 2012, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > And you must take care because $(shell dpkg-buildflags ...) will not see
> > the DEB_CFLAGS_MAINT_PREPEND that you have set in the rules
> > files. Either you do $(shell
> > DEB_CFLAGS_MAINT_PREPEND=... dpkg-buildflags ...) or you use
> > /usr/share/dpkg
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012, Matthijs Kooijman wrote:
> > -ifneq (,$(filter noopt,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS)))
> > -CFLAGS += -O0
> > -else
> > -CFLAGS += -O2
> > -endif
> > +CFLAGS := -Wall $(shell dpkg-buildflags --get CFLAGS)
> > ifeq (,$(filter nostrip,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS)))
> > INSTALL_PROGRAM
On Tue, 24 Jan 2012, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> A.2.2. debdiff, A.5.3. dcut and A.6.7. dpkg-depcheck styles of
> handwriting are Bold.
> It seems that it will be changed into bold if it surrounds by .
> Commands other than these are surrounded by .
> Therefore, the style of handwriting is not Bold
On Fri, 13 Jan 2012, Russ Allbery wrote:
> +
> +
> +library-soname main-dependency-template
> +[ | alternative-dependency-template ]
> +[ ... ]
> +[ * field-name: field-value ]
> +[ ... ]
> + symbol minimal-version[
> id-of-dependency-template ]
> +
I think this descripti
On Fri, 13 Jan 2012, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >>For our example, the zlib1g symbols file
> >>would contain:
> >>
> >> * Build-Depends-Package: zlib1g-dev
> >>
> >>(Don't forget the leading space.)
>
> > What leading space are you referring to ?
>
> I now have
Hi,
On Mon, 02 Jan 2012, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> If a package contains a binary or library which links to a
> shared library, we must ensure that, when the package is
> installed on the system, all of the libraries needed are also
> installed. These dependen
Hi,
On Mon, 09 Jan 2012, David Prévot wrote:
> As you may have noticed, the English document looks different: I quickly
> copied and pasted part of the maint-guide build system (the xslt
> directory is directly copied from there, and probably needs to be
> adapted to keep the current look), in ord
Hi,
On Mon, 28 Nov 2011, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> On the other hand, if you are saying that packagers should not wait
> for any official pronouncement to implement whatever
> DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=verbose/quiet option they please, then I would agree
> with you. xz-utils has supported DEB_BUILD_OPTION
On Sat, 05 Nov 2011, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 01:14:31PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > Package: debian-policy
> > Version: 3.9.2.0
> > Severity: normal
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > here is a patch that updates §9.10: now that doc-base uses triggers, I
> > think it
> > is b
On Sat, 05 Nov 2011, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Of course entities are translatable. What are you actually wanting to say ?
Well, nowadays we expect to handle translations just with PO files. And in
this context, you're expected to keep an entity between the original
string and the translated one.
"
On Fri, 04 Nov 2011, Bill Allombert wrote:
> I would suggest we use entities instead of hard-coding 'MUST NOT/SHOULD NOT'.
> This way it will be easier to generate policy document with the lower case
> variant for people who cannot read uppercase words.
Entities are not translatable. Even if there
Hi,
On Sat, 01 Oct 2011, Charles Plessy wrote:
> how about also removing ‘unofficial’ in the sentence below ?
>
> Please read the unofficial debian-mentors FAQ aturl="&url-mentors;"> first.
Agreed, I have made the change locally, will push later.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Devel
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> "Thinking" is not enough, we would like to see facts.
I just wanted to add that changing this means changing the names of many
compressed log files and potentially breaking some (custom) scripts which
are relying on the current configu
Hello Jérôme,
you have been filing such bugs in Ubuntu and I closed at least one you
filed against dpkg.
I hope that if this debian-policy request gets turned off, you will stop
filing such wishlist bugs everywhere.
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011, Jérôme wrote:
> Most of the time I think that log files com
On Sun, 11 Sep 2011, Charles Plessy wrote:
> This adds Built-Using in §5.6.10 (“Package interrelationship fields: Depends,
> Pre-Depends, Recommends, Suggests, Breaks, Conflicts, Provides, Replaces,
> Enhances”). In Policy's chapter 5, the fields in that list are documented to
> be present in sour
On Mon, 15 Aug 2011, Luca Falavigna wrote:
> > Right. Could someone update the patch?
>
> Patch refreshed with Santiago's suggestions.
> I took the time to expand it a little bit.
I merged it but I changed the wording (hopefully improving it!).
Cf attached patch.
Thanks for your contribution!
C
Hi,
On Sat, 03 Sep 2011, Giovanni Mascellani wrote:
> I though about this, but couldn't come up with any easy solution. I
> mostly consider this tool to be useful for people who just have to check
> the very last versions of the policy, so the problem is actually quite
> mitigated.
>
> I don't ev
On Mon, 04 Jul 2011, David Prévot wrote:
> I can't remember how the branches looks like on DDP Subversion
> repository, and I can't find an on line view of Subversion repository on
> the new Alioth front-end, could someone please refresh my memory or push
> developers-reference r8880 content to its
Hi,
On Sat, 18 Jun 2011, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > 1/ I'd argue that in the case of downgrade, dpkg should not try to run
> >the failed-upgrade fallback because there's no way the oldest version
> >can be aware of how to work-around
Hi,
to better understand this mail you can refer to this diagram
http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/MaintainerScripts.html#sec-3.4.3
During an upgrade from V1 to V2, if "V1->prerm upgrade V2" fails, dpkg tries
to run "V2->prerm failed-upgrade V1" and if it works the upgrade
continues normally.
T
Hi,
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011, chris h wrote:
> We (Grml) would like to switch back to short Version: strings for our
> kernel packages, as they already have the major "version number" in
> the package name, to allow co-installation of multiple versions, and
> there's no point in duplicating this info i
Hi David,
On Wed, 08 Jun 2011, David Prévot wrote:
> Lucas, Raphaël, could we consider moving away of pdflatex build? This
> may allow to build the Japanese PDF, which would also be an improvement.
I don't care much of the build process (as long as it works and it stays
out of my way).
If anythi
Hi,
On Mon, 06 Jun 2011, Guillem Jover wrote:
> And to me that's one of the problems with Build-Options/Features,
> another being the duplicated information. If we consider
> build-arch/build-indep something useful enough to be widely usable
> on all packages producing arch:any + arch:all packages
Hi,
On Mon, 06 Jun 2011, Roger Leigh wrote:
> Has the following been considered:
> - adding a command-line option for dpkg-buildpackage to explicitly
> enable particular build-features (overriding the feature in the
> source package).
This has not been suggested yet, I'm not opposed to the id
Hi,
On Tue, 24 May 2011, Bill Allombert wrote:
> 2) This change breaks actual packages. Even if no such package exist in
> squeeze, users
> could still want to install older or unofficial packages, or created with
> dpkg-repack.
The next version of dpkg has --force-bad-version to work around th
Hi,
On Mon, 16 May 2011, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > +The list may include (or consist solely of) the special
>
> This has switched from tabs to spaces.
This is due to a bad "vim" modeline. I fixed it as well. Looks like policy
editors mainly use emacs :)
> With those fixed, seconded.
Hello,
On Fri, 22 Apr 2011, Martin Eberhard Schauer wrote:
> reviewing the German translation I found that this section is
> outdated. I rewrote some
> of the stuff with my background as Debian translator.
Can you send your suggestions as a patch to the docbook files?
$ svn co svn://svn.debian.o
On Wed, 20 Apr 2011, Chris Leick wrote:
> Hi,
>
> while translating this reference to german, I've found some typos
> and punctuation errors. The patch attached will fix them.
No it will not. You need to fix the errors in the .dbk files.
But it's nice to avoid fuzzying the translations, so it's
On Fri, 08 Apr 2011, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> It does not allow them in available though breaking many systems that
> have or in the past had a package with such a version available. At
> least 4 people on irc have run into that problem that I saw already.
It does allow them in available. Tho
On Mon, 04 Apr 2011, Carsten Hey wrote:
> upstream_version git1234 could be prefixed with epoch 0 and thus lead to
> the version number 0:git1234-debian_revision. Maybe this could be
> mentioned in the policy.
No, the check is on the first digit of the "upstream version". The epoch
is ignored.
C
Hi,
On Mon, 04 Apr 2011, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > 1. upstream_version must start with a digit;
>
> Unfortunately, we cannot force upstream to use a version that start by a
> digit,
> We would need to document a mangling process for upstream version that start
> by a letter.
We have no upstream
On Sun, 03 Apr 2011, Russ Allbery wrote:
> My inclination is to second this, but I want to make sure that we've
> answered your and Julien's objections first.
And for complete reference, dpkg accepts those version in
/var/lib/dpkg/status (so that dpkg still works for users with affected
packages i
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
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011, Bill Allombert wrote:
> First this might force users to use UTF-8 locale. While this is the default,
> this is not
> mandatory in Debian. I know users that stays with ISO8859-1 because they have
> a lot of
> text files in that encoding.
>
> Until the C.UTF-8 proposal is impl
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011, Bill Allombert wrote:
> So this raises two issues:
> 1) should non-7bit characters in filenames be allowed
Yes, I don't see a good reason to forbid them. In particular when we are
in an international environment and we are targetting full localization.
> 2) if yes whould we r
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> I like your proposed alternative. Maybe the policy could say that you
> "should" (in the policy sense) thoroughly analyze the consequences and
> alternatives before adding pre-depends, and that one way to do so (in
> a friendly advice sense) is to ask
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Well, I want to interpret it as meaning *something* --- though I'm not
> filing RC bugs or anything. I had thought that the general rule is
> that violating a policy "should" is always a bug (either in your
> package or in policy), though not necessari
tag 619990 pending
thanks
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > Please drop this link. It's really of no use to point people to
> > britney's code (note it's not the web version of the above link...).
>
> Et voilà ! (attached).
Thanks, applied.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Deve
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 3.9.1.0
>
> Raphael Hertzog wrote[1]:
>
> > It has been discussed on -release, not on -devel:
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2011/02/threads.html#00381
> >
> > (I
On Tue, 29 Mar 2011, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Also I suppose some discussion on debian-devel has already taken place
> to make this pre-dependency possible without worrying about policy
> §3.5? If not, I'd be interested in either an explicit exception or
> the perfunctory discussion on -devel, whi
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Hi Raphaël,
>
> it seems that things changed overnight:
Yes, see 20110329215524.ga21...@thrall.0x539.de by Phil Kern.
> The links to the Git repositories would be an interesting addition. But I
> even
> found a third one:
>
> http://git.debian.or
Hi,
On Tue, 29 Mar 2011, Charles Plessy wrote:
> - For Britney, I do not find the equivalent on ries.d.o for the following:
>merkel:/org/&ftp-debian-org;/testing/update_out/
>merkel:~aba/testing/update_out Was it moved somewhere else ?
It's now part of release.debian.org and thus not mi
On Sat, 26 Mar 2011, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 04:25:46PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> >First line is always
> > the source entry.
>
> Do you want this constraint part of the definition or a implem
011, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 03:14:00PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > It looks like this:
> > Package-List:
> > src:dpkg admin required
>
> Is there a reason for not listing the type explicit for every entry?
> Something like this:
&g
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011, Julien Cristau wrote:
> Does XC-Package-Type also work? debhelper uses
> /^(?:X[BC]*-)?Package-Type:\s*(.*)/ to populate the package type.
Yes. I was simplifying somewhat.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer
Follow my Debian News ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.com (Engl
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 03:14:00PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > Package-List:
> > src:dpkg admin required
> > dpkg admin required
> > dpkg-dev utils optional
> > libdpkg-dev libdevel optional
> > libdp
1 - 100 of 328 matches
Mail list logo
