On 1/27/22 5:11 PM, Sean Whitton wrote:
Hello David,
...
Reviewing this bug, it is still not clear to me that a virtual package
is wanted as opposed to just making /usr/bin/todo a path managed by the
alternatives system.
I'm closing the bug, but if development that has taken place i
Felix Lechner writes:
>
> The installable stanzas in d/control (called "binary package
> paragraphs" in policy) inherit the Section field from the source
> paragraph. There is no reason to provide inheritance the other way
> around.
>
> Also, sources may not build successfully on all architecture
Russ Allbery writes:
> Currently, Debian Policy is silent on when it's appropriate to use a
> native package, but there may be a project consensus aganist using
> native packages when the software has an existence outside of Debian.
Personally I don't think Debian policy should be concerned with
On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 11:53 AM Novy, Ondrej
wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Jan 2021 14:20:57 +0100 Bill Allombert
> wrote:
> > What Sean meant is that, at this stage, this proposal needs to be
> > seconded by people impacted by this virtual package before being
> > accepted.
>
> as maintainer of todotxt-c
control: tag -1 - moreinfo
On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 11:32 AM David Steele wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 5:29 PM David Steele wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 3:42 PM Sean Whitton
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Could you provide an actual pat
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 5:29 PM David Steele wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 3:42 PM Sean Whitton
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Could you provide an actual patch against policy.git, please, for
>> seconding? See README.md in policy.git for more info.
>>
>
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 2:34 PM David Steele wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 2:14 PM Sean Whitton
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Okay, and you expect every implementation of todo.txt to have
>> tdtcleanup? I think we probably want to specify that as one of the (or
&
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 2:14 PM Sean Whitton
wrote:
>
> Okay, and you expect every implementation of todo.txt to have
> tdtcleanup? I think we probably want to specify that as one of the (or
> the only?) requirements of the virtual package.
>
No, no.
The gtd stuff is an optional add-on to tod
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 5:29 PM David Steele wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 3:48 PM Sean Whitton
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Putting aside the use of the alternatives system, why is a virtual
>> package wanted? When would it be useful to be able to declare a
&g
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 3:48 PM Sean Whitton
wrote:
>
>
> Putting aside the use of the alternatives system, why is a virtual
> package wanted? When would it be useful to be able to declare a
> dependency and have it satisfied by one of these implementations?
>
>
As an example, a future rev of an
control: tag -1 + patch
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 3:42 PM Sean Whitton
wrote:
>
> Could you provide an actual patch against policy.git, please, for
> seconding? See README.md in policy.git for more info.
>
> --
> Sean Whitton
>
https://salsa.debian.org/steele/policy/-/tree/bug976402-steele
d
On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 2:44 PM David Steele wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 3:21 AM Ansgar wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Should emacs provide a "todo" script to open ~/TODO (with say org-mode)?
>>
>
In regards to org mode. I'd add a third criter
On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 3:21 AM Ansgar wrote:
>
> Given topydo just provides/conflicts with devtodo to provide the "todo"
> binary, this seems to violate Policy 10.1 "Binaries" unless they provide
> the same functionality.
>
Note that there is a Conflicts because the current devtodo
does not supp
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 6:39 PM Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 06:23:44PM -0500, David Steele wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 6:21 PM David Steele wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 5:54 PM Bill Allombert
> wrote:
> > >
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 6:21 PM David Steele wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 5:54 PM Bill Allombert wrote:
>
>>
>> Are people using /usr/bin/todo in script or Makefile ?
>> Are they likely to still work with the alternatives ?
>>
>
> I'd say no. It
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 5:54 PM Bill Allombert wrote:
>
> Are people using /usr/bin/todo in script or Makefile ?
> Are they likely to still work with the alternatives ?
>
I'd say no. It is an interactive end-user command.
This gives flexibility in what they are interacting with.
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 4:42 PM Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 01:34:44PM -0500, David Steele wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 1:15 PM Bill Allombert
> wrote:
> >
> > > Do you envision to have packages depending on todo and then use the
> >
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 1:15 PM Bill Allombert wrote:
> What about devtodo ?
>
> Reading your summary, it seems that the todo.txt virtual package
> is well specified, but the todo one is not.
>
> Do you envision to have packages depending on todo and then use the
> todo binary ?
>
No. This is a m
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 12:30 PM Bill Allombert wrote:
>
> Does all theses tools provide an compatible interface ?
> In other word, are there interoperable ?
>
Yes, topydo and todotxt-cli support common commands, which make them
interoperable for most uses. However, the command sets are not iden
Package: debian-policy
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-de...@lists.debian.org, charlesmel...@outlook.com,
on...@debian.org
thanks
I'd like to propose adding the virtual packages "todo" and "todo.txt" to
the authoritative list of virtual package names. I'm submitting this per
Bill Allombert writes:
>
> In any case, this is an upstream choice, not a packaging choice, so we
> have to use what upstream provide.
>
Just to be clear using /etc/default is not an upstream choice, it's a
Debian convention. I know you probably didn't mean to imply that, but
that's how it read
Sean Whitton writes:
>
>> -No package for a 64 bit architecture may install files in
>> -``/usr/lib64/`` or in a subdirectory of it.
>> +Packages must not install files in ``/usr/lib64`` or in a subdirectory
>> +of it.
>
> This seems to be a semantic change, generalising the requi
On Sun, Oct 6, 2019, 8:17 PM Sean Whitton wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Sat 05 Oct 2019 at 07:30PM -04, David Steele wrote:
>
> > I'm going to drop my objection, and assume that this is saying I don't
> need to
> > write init scripts for my special case.
>
On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 1:06 PM Sean Whitton wrote:
>
> Hello David,
>
> On Sun 29 Sep 2019 at 10:35AM -04, David Steele wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 1:05 PM Sean Whitton
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> On Sat 28 Sep 20
..],
> > unless software is only usable, by upstream's design, when
> > pid1 is provided by some other init system.
>
> I think this would work. What do you think, David?
I don't know. It provides more clarity the original Policy question, but raises
a te
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 2:00 PM Ansgar wrote:
>
> Well, the Policy Editors currently see no consensus; so to change it one
> would need to convince them, involve the tech-ctte or a GR.
>
The Policy needs to either explicitly discourage the use of
systemd-specific features, or recognize the sysv-i
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 12:18 PM Ansgar wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 2019-09-22 at 16:13 -0400, David Steele wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 2:10 PM Sean Whitton
> > wrote:
> > > The Policy Editors have decided that dropping the requirement to ship
> > &
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 11:43 AM Dmitry Bogatov wrote:
>
>
> [2019-09-22 16:13] David Steele
> > Candidate language attached. It adds "Also excepted are packages which
> > require a
> > feature of an alternate init system which is not available in SysV-St
not available in SysV-Style
init systems.". Thoughts?
--
AE0D BF5A 92A5 ADE4 9481 BA6F 8A31 71EF 3661 50CE
From 5b99099d370b6304cadaedc99d5f8d8cd3063c71 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: David Steele
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 15:53:12 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] Clarify exception to sysv init script
Aurelien Jarno writes:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 4.4.0.1
> Severity: wishlist
>
> There is already a section about reproducibility in the debian-policy,
> but it only mentions the binary packages. It might be a good idea to
> add a new requirement that repeatedly building the source pac
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 11:15 AM Sean Whitton wrote:
>
> I think that the wording for this change should reflect the above
> (unless I've misunderstood David), such that the new wording cannot be
> misinterpreted to mean that the sysvinit requirement does not apply to
> a
Re-sending to the bug thread.
-- Forwarded message -
From: David Steele
Date: Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 9:15 AM
Subject: Re: Bug#932704: debian-policy: Don't force sysvinit
compatibility if e.g. alternate init required
To: Sean Whitton
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 7:02 AM Sean Wh
Source: debian-policy
Version: 4.4.0.1
Severity: normal
In section 9.11 (The Operating System/Alternate init systems), it is
stated that "...any package integrating with other init systems must
also be backwards-compatible with sysvinit by providing a SysV-style
init script...". There is a single
Sean Whitton writes:
>
> diff --git a/policy/ch-docs.rst b/policy/ch-docs.rst
> index 1de221f..e990f34 100644
> --- a/policy/ch-docs.rst
> +++ b/policy/ch-docs.rst
> @@ -255,32 +255,45 @@ files may be installed into ``/usr/share/doc/package``.
>
> .. _s-changelogs:
>
> -Changelog files
> ---
#x27;reasonably'.
>
> Yes.
>
>> Here is the revised patch; David and Andrey, hopefully you will renew
>> your seconds:
>
> LGTM.
>
> Ian.
Revised version seconded.
d
Sean Whitton writes:
>
> Here is a revised patch; David, hopefully you will renew your second.
>
>> diff --git a/policy/ch-source.rst b/policy/ch-source.rst
>> index 9e7d79c..890c479 100644
>> --- a/policy/ch-source.rst
>> +++ b/policy/ch-source.rst
>>
Sean Whitton writes:
>
> I am therefore seeking seconds for the following patch. In seconding
> this, please remember that to second something is not simply to say that
> you agree with the change, but also to indicate agreement with my
> judgement that the change reflects project consensus.
sec
Sean Whitton writes:
> control: tag -1 +patch
>
> Hello,
>
> Here is a patch, for which I am seeking seconds, that tries to capture
> the points raised by Osamu, Guillem and Paul without getting into
> legalese -- Bill has a point. In particular, I think we can trust
> package maintainers to int
Sean Whitton writes:
>> diff --git a/policy/ch-docs.rst b/policy/ch-docs.rst
>> index 1de221f..1503ed8 100644
>> --- a/policy/ch-docs.rst
>> +++ b/policy/ch-docs.rst
>> @@ -255,32 +255,48 @@ files may be installed into ``/usr/share/doc/package``.
>>
>> .. _s-changelogs:
>>
>> -Changelog files
>
Sean Whitton writes:
>> OK. Something like this?
>>
>> Packages must not contain files in /home, and packages' maintainer
>> scripts must not write to users' home directories. The programs in
>> those packages may create directory hierarchies as described in
>> §3.8.3 "Home Direct
Adam Borowski writes:
>
> Sounds better than mine. I'd re-add "once that package has been accepted
> into the archive", to make it obvious that resubmissions to NEW and/or
> mentors are expected to reuse version numbers of what they amend.
Personally, I usually increase version numbers in those
Ian Jackson writes:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 4.1.3.0
>
> We had another thread on debian-devel recently, in which it once again
> became evident that epochs are misunderstood. Epoch bumps should be
> rare and there are often better solutions. I suggest that we should
> ask people to
Sean Whitton writes:
> Let me first say exactly what change I'd recommend:
>
> - out-of-date-standards-version should be I: or P: instead of W:
> - ancient-standards-version should remain W:
> - ancient-standards-version should be triggered when S-V contains a
> release of Policy from the previ
ensive takes off. SCNR)
> I second this patch. I suggest we add it as section 3.1.1, i.e., as a
> subsection to 3.1 "The package name".
[As this is the first subsection I wonder if there will soon be many
more "rip-off" naming conventions added like python-*, *-perl
en FHS, switching from one
version to another would cause huge brokenness…).
Regards
David
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Sean Whitton writes:
> +.. _s-nonexistent:
> +
> +Non-existent home directories
> +~
> +
> +The canonical non-existent home directory is ``/nonexistent``. Users
> +who should not have a home directory should have their home directory
> +set to this value.
> +
> +The D
Sean Whitton writes:
> diff --git a/policy.xml b/policy.xml
> index 3daa532..934a85b 100644
> --- a/policy.xml
> +++ b/policy.xml
> @@ -8990,14 +8990,8 @@ Reloading description
> configuration...done.
> receive extra contributions such as translations.
>
>
> -Pac
>
> So yes at any time they are a number of active, hard-working team, but there
> also a larger number of phantom team that used to be active, but whose
> packages are still maintained in Debian. It is important they carry some
> valid information about the effective maintainers.
>
What are the
On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 01:14:49PM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
>
> """
> Any package installing shared libraries in one of the default library
> directories of the dynamic linker (which are currently /usr/lib and
> /lib) or a directory that is listed in /etc/ld.so.conf[60] must use
> ldconfig to u
kg version number since it is older than the
> version in oldstable
>
> - move the text out of tags since we're trying to reduce the
> number of footnotes in Policy.
>
> --
> Sean Whitton
Seconded
David Bremner
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 04:51:51PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> I'm not sure why Jonathan thinks his patch is a strawman. It addresses
> the main issue of this bug. I don't think the explanation of what an
> upstream contact is needs to be relegated to a footnote. So I am
> seeking seconds for t
Hi,
Le 08/01/2017 à 09:42, Russ Allbery a écrit :
> […] the Format
> URI for the current copyright-format document is actually a redirect.
Nitpicking: it’s actually not a real redirect. Fetching it directly
(e.g., using wget) works via plain HTTP.
Regards.
David
signature.asc
Descr
appily accept any patch flying my way
implementing architecture wildcards differently if need be, but I am not
going to do it myself mainly because I expect that to have fallout – not
in apt, but in things using apt – and I don't have the energy (or the
rights) to deal with such things efficiently.
Best regards
David Kalnischkies
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ian is actually pointing is the missing “Files: *”
paragraph (instead of inaccurately using the header paragraph to
document the main license), or any variant of it (e.g., documenting
every files or directories in their own “Files” paragraph, as debian/*
already is).
Regards
David
signature.a
gt; Which is, as far as I read the policy, a definite false positive, since
> the "dog" license is specified.
You may have missed: “The Copyright and License fields in the header
paragraph may complement but do not replace the Files paragraphs.”
https://www.debian.org/doc/packagin
ideration about versioned virtual package may evolve with the dpkg
implementation, so I don’t believe it is worth it to document it in the
policy, at least not right now anyway.
Regards
David
From 2f94884f6b8bf9d46588906c17be7852b636567b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?David=20Pr=C3=A9vot?=
Bill Allombert writes:
>
> Do you know if there is a org to XML (or SGML) conversion option ?
>
There is HTML output (which you are already using) and ODT output. Both
are in some sense XML. I didn't work through how to get uncompressed XML
from the ODT export, but attached find README.org conve
Bill Allombert writes:
> E: debian-policy: privacy-breach-may-use-debian-package
> usr/share/doc/debian-policy/Process.html
> You may use libjs-mathjax package. (http://orgmode.org/mathjax/mathjax.js)
OK, so this is all a bit silly to display π, but you can either
diff --git a/Process.org b/P
Bill Allombert writes:
> E: debian-policy: privacy-breach-may-use-debian-package
> usr/share/doc/debian-policy/Process.html
> You may use libjs-mathjax package. (http://orgmode.org/mathjax/mathjax.js)
Hmm. I don't have much experience with that js stuff. It might be
possible to turn off mathjax
Rob Browning writes:
> Bill Allombert writes:
>
>> What to do for ascii :
>>
>> emacs24 --batch -Q -l ./README-css.el -l org -l org-ascii
>> --visit Process.org --funcall org-export-as-ascii
>>
Attached is a better patch series that fixes the ascii export,
and deals with all the (unused) TeX cr
Bill Allombert writes:
>> That function is now in ox-html.el
>
> Are you sure ?
> grep org-export-as-html-batch /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/org-mode/ox-html.el
> does not return anything.
Sorry, I was misled by emacs function name completion. The following is
a partial solution. There is still s
That function is now in ox-html.el
Maybe loading that explicitly (as well as org?) helps.
d
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87a93wntyp@maritor
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.
taffit pushed a change to branch master
in repository developers-reference.
from 9a6f361 German po4a translation: Review by Erik Pfannenstein
new 6fbf9ac Update French translation
new afa2132 tidypo: C
ersion repository that it moved (and
remove it to avoid contributions there).
It’s too late for the former, but I believe the latter should definitely
be handled ASAP.
Regards
David
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJT2PT/AAoJEAWMHPlE9r08ZkAH/RWsXqVqeJ8KmF5AX2
DD to install and use non-free tools (as
potential security issue), and furthermore that spending time on such
games may not be the most productive use of their time for the project.
Regards
David
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJS4FTLAAoJEAWMHPlE9r08M
Package: debian-policy
Severity: minor
Tags: patch
Hi,
Policy 4.11 advertise DEHS while the “DEHS service is dead since August
2011.” [0]
0: https://wiki.debian.org/DEHS
Regards
David
From 635b679d09b9eafabaa9a20747fce865d6ff50fb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?David=20Pr=C3
on the localhost address, or
- if the machine running apache2 is also used for web browsing.
http://www.debian.org/security/2012/dsa-2452
Regards
David
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJR3icXAAoJEAWMHPlE9r08QQIH/A8GdNzMY26C/9JdQd
e the last item of the title for
consistency with the content. I don't have other nip-tick to propose, so
I second it too (with or without the title changed).
Regards
David
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJQVn0dAAoJELgqIXr9/gny/IIQAL2q
ormal DocBook markup for a cross-reference to
> a manual page. If I'm remembering correctly, we should use that markup
> here.
That would be
debconf-escape 1
if the developpers-reference do it right.
Regards
David
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
t: fwiw, at least until I change my mind I'd
say $c > $c-p-u > t > tpu
[…]
16:44 < adsb> using the codename everywhere would have saved a bit of
pain with e.g. security updates which were prepared for lenny-as-stable
but not published until after the squeeze release for some reas
Hi Chris, Hideki,
Le 08/08/2012 21:48, David Prévot a écrit :
> I'd be happy to poke translators
And here I am, could you please update your translation in order to push
the last up to date version in the upcoming Wheezy?
> po4a/po/de.po: 1319 translated messages, 22 fuzzy tran
soon as the
translations are ready.
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.
Regards
David
signature.asc
Thanks Jakub, fixed in Subversion and trivially unfuzzied too.
Regards
David
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJQFFMQAAoJELgqIXr9/gnyU24P/RY0h37acfuDh6GJRcpjzcch
Vgg+yse/5migGjgGb0U1FcP7MqdPIwItsuLwG3fgYvLjDy6HaAJ33K1RtjZj4X16
xCNjeGrLij0TI54OUTjj
, 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.
Regards
David
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
ed automatically during a stable or security update. Please
prefer using at least 100. Anyway, “The APT preferences file does not
affect the choice of instance, only the choice of version.” according to
apt_preferences(5).
Regards
David
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Le 03/03/2012 06:10, Charles Plessy a écrit :
> Le Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 08:21:31PM -0800, Russ Allbery a écrit :
>> David Prévot writes:
>>
>>> There is something else I didn't thought earlier: with the conversion
>>> from DebianDoc to DocBook, the HTML pages
them as soon as possible with the updated Policy. If I understood
correctly, it won't be in the version you'll publish next week, but in a
later one, so there is no hurry (we already prepared such redirections
for other documents recently converted, so it shouldn't be too difficult
, one can safely work on that bug without any
fear to break the website. Once pending, some coordination will be
needed with the webmasters before the upload, in order to remove the
current trick (and eventually prepare another (Redirect) workaround to
keep the old links active).
Regards
David
s
s for translation of "pristine" you marked for FIXME, I agree it needs
Hideki, don't hesitate to ping me when you're ready: Chris already
updated the German translation so I'd be happy to upload the package
when you'll give the green light.
Regards
David
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
tags 629530 pending
thanks.
Hi,
Le 09/01/2012 12:49, David Prévot a écrit :
>> Le 07/06/2011 08:56, Osamu Aoki a écrit :
>>> If you move this build this with XeTeX (specifically xelatex), this
>>> problem goes away.
>
> Indeed, I just rebuilt it with
Le 10/01/2012 03:26, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> 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
> Why did you have to do this change? Was it not e
with XeTeX and it works:
http://people.debian.org/~taffit/developers-reference-xetex/developers-reference.pdf
Le 08/06/2011 13:13, David Prévot a écrit :
> Lucas, Raphaël, could we consider moving away of pdflatex build? This
> may allow to build the Japanese PDF, which would also be an improvement.
David
- -- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable'), (1,
'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 3.1.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/1 CPU core)
Locale
Le 26/12/2011 22:19, David Prévot a écrit :
> Le 26/11/2011 03:27, Charles Plessy a écrit :
>> For the text version, I am not sure how necessary it is.
>> […] not distributing [the text version] at all [is] also valid option
> CCing debian-policy, in case someone has an op
more accurate?
1: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/mime-policy/
2: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html#s-mime
Regards
David
Index: english/doc/devel-manuals.wml
===
RCS file: /cvs/webwml/webwml/english/do
tags 649811 patch
thanks...
Le 26/11/2011 03:27, Charles Plessy a écrit :
> Le Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 11:31:58PM -0400, David Prévot a écrit :
> In your patch, only one version is expected.
Thanks for spotting that, the purpose was indeed to get all available
versions.
>> Attac
symlinks hacks in favor of Redirect to handle shipped
documents in their canonical places, i.e manuals [3] and
packaging-manuals [2], the only remaining exception being the
debian-policy [1]).
1: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/
2: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/
3: http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals
Regards
David
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 20/11/2011 22:04, David Prévot wrote:
> Hi,
Ooops, I replied on a wrong list, sorry for the noise.
Regards
David
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
it
may need.
Until an official Debian position emerge in favor of this kind of
fund-raising campaigns, I propose that the DPN editors won't relay them
without at least an internal consensus.
Cheers
David
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ in the
>> spec.
>
> I overlooked README.org, which was missing from the patch. Here is an updated
> one. Comments or seconds are welcome.
Seconded, thanks for working on that.
Regards
David
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
configuration option, and
shouldn't be assumed in Policy IMHO.
I suggest to drop "Recommends" from that sentence or, if we want to make sure
no non-main packages get pulled in, maybe that "require" should be changed to
something else ("cause the installation of&
L file named
> copyright-format-1.0.html, which the web team would then copy as
> index.html into a directory named after the version number.
Thanks Russ, such a name (copyright-format-.html) would totally
fit the (maybe badly expressed, sorry if I confused you, Charles)
requirements I c
one will have to dig up old
debian-policy packages in order to retrieve all copyright-format versions…
Regards
David
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJOgOeTAAoJELgqIXr9/gnye+YQAJyz3pckOU6eD4fE8t+NcAS5
sAU/fbCenhqd0Ii62TOS+G9JkZy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Le 09/06/2011 08:23, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> On Wed, 08 Jun 2011, David Prévot wrote:
>> […] it
>> could be a good time to extract the content from the latest package than
>> building the Subversion version on www-maste
on of the developers-reference
which add a new translation. I'll ask for translation update if they're
not up to date in order to do so, unless you disagree.
Regards
David
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJN763GAAoJELgqIXr9/g
t long. Even if
you think putting hashes in version numbers is not useful, I'm pretty
sure we don't want to enumerate every possible thing that is not
permitted in version numbers.
I'd think the obvious place to start would be for policy to specify
limits on version length. May
in order to track this issue).
Regards
David
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJNsYMLAAoJELgqIXr9/gny6oUP/3uStHVV5xlZvANJhHfTRpNb
29inbg+hEYiB4seR3D+jH8xXWOxpBaIbsFre8PQeUTXXJQv35ICsQQ+voSUcG2Oy
IvRcEcY+1gpIv4XZ1gi2t32Zm
you probably don't want that ;-).
Regards
David
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJNr5YCAAoJELgqIXr9/gnyME4QAJQyZQuGK3y3OS1As/zuEhIK
398mNat9D4LnJyIlez/tSlqNd/ONzoHZk+al8yRNUPNp4Mv4fFfthVMgMpxZVw1E
sJ0YfVjMsOJXs5SflyNFlm86xpGWaT+1VZZ
een applied already in a later version I must have missed this in the
comment log. :-/
--
- David A. Holland / dholl...@eecs.harvard.edu
--
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/20110108192243.ga5...@eecs.harvard.edu
hello,
Can this please get done (adding a C.UTF-8 locale)? It is absolutely
required for writing shell scripts that handle UTF-8 data, if you want
those shell scripts to have anything like portable or reliable
behavior.
--
- David A. Holland / dholl...@eecs.harvard.edu
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
1 - 100 of 262 matches
Mail list logo
