On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 12:34:30PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 02:44:00AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > I'd rather we stopped looking at policy as "mandating things".
>
> > There are three things policy's trying to do at the moment:
> >
> > 1) specify technical stand
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 18:54:31 +1000, Anthony Towns
said:
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 12:50:53AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> In my view, policy is supposed to represent the minimum set of
>> rules that packages follow to allow the parts to dovetail together.
> I don't think that makes sense
On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 02:44:00AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > I'd rather if we dropped all such transitional issues from the Policy
> > manual. They're just bother and don't really have to be here to be mandated
> > by the project (examples abound -- libc6-migration, fhs migration, C++ 3
> > t
On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 06:54:31PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> But doing any of that requires a document that's willing to cover all
> the things we're trying to achieve. Having many documents doesn't work,
> because packagers coming to Debian need to be able to find *everything*
> that affects t
On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 12:50:53AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> In my view, policy is supposed to represent the minimum set of
> rules that packages follow to allow the parts to dovetail together.
I don't think that makes sense -- getting packages to dovetail together
isn't something th
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 02:44:00 +1000, Anthony Towns
said:
> I'd rather we stopped looking at policy as "mandating things". There
> are three things policy's trying to do at the moment:
> 1) specify technical standards, like version formats and package
> names
> 2) specify packaging an
On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 12:26:16PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > http://people.debian.org/~rmurray/c++transition.html
> > Ps: you might want to consider retiring the libc6 transition document.
> I'd rather if we dropped all such transitional issues from the Policy
> manual. They're just bother an
On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 10:41:46AM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 3.6.1.0
> Severity: normal
>
> again someone asks for what to do about gcc 2.95->3.2 transition and
> the right place would be to point to the debian-policy package just as
> with the libc6 transi
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.6.1.0
Severity: normal
Hi,
again someone asks for what to do about gcc 2.95->3.2 transition and
the right place would be to point to the debian-policy package just as
with the libc6 transition.
Please include
http://people.debian.org/~rmurray/c++transition.htm
9 matches
Mail list logo
