Russ Allbery writes:
> If we were starting from scratch, I agree, but I'm not sure how to
> phrase that.
>
> Here's what I currently have, which has one second from Julien and
> previous seconds from Manoj and Raphaël for previous versions of the
> wording. I'd welcome any additional proposals f
On Sat, Jul 04 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Bill Allombert writes:
>
>> I think the cost of moving window managers out of /etc/X11 far
>> outweight the benefit. However the same rationale about moving
>> programs out of /usr/bin/X11, /usr/lib/X11, etc. apply here. If one
>> day we move to X12, /et
Bill Allombert writes:
> I think the cost of moving window managers out of /etc/X11 far
> outweight the benefit. However the same rationale about moving
> programs out of /usr/bin/X11, /usr/lib/X11, etc. apply here. If one
> day we move to X12, /etc/X11 will probably have to go.
>
> I do not thin
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 09:43:57AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Bill Allombert writes:
>
> > My comment would be that we should avoid implying that putting window
> > managers config file in /etc/X11/.../ is a good idea... But of course
> > it is not the time for policy to forbid it either.
>
>
Bill Allombert writes:
> My comment would be that we should avoid implying that putting window
> managers config file in /etc/X11/.../ is a good idea... But of course
> it is not the time for policy to forbid it either.
Hm. Do you feel that way just for new window managers, or that ones
that cu
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 12:07:35PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> "Bernhard R. Link" writes:
> > * Russ Allbery [090620 23:55]:
>
> >> I'm not sure either. This was already in Policy prior to this round
> >> of changes, of course, but maybe since we're revising this section
> >> anyway, this is t
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 23:54:13 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Julien Cristau writes:
>
> > Ping Russ? :)
>
> Sorry about the long delay on the rewrite of the X installation
> directory section. Here's proposed rewording for the whole section.
> How does this look to everyone?
>
Seconded, alon
"Bernhard R. Link" writes:
> * Russ Allbery [090620 23:55]:
>> I'm not sure either. This was already in Policy prior to this round
>> of changes, of course, but maybe since we're revising this section
>> anyway, this is the time to remove it. To remove it, I'd drop the
>> should and turn it in
* Russ Allbery [090620 23:55]:
> Raphael Hertzog writes:
>
> > On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> + Configuration files for window managers and display managers
> >> + should be placed in a subdirectory of /etc/X11/
> >> + corresponding to the package name due to these
* Bernhard R. Link [090621 16:10]:
> > Configuration files for window managers and display managers
> > may be placed in a subdirectory of /etc/X11/
> > corresponding to the package name. Other X Window System
> > applications should use the /etc/ d
Raphael Hertzog writes:
> On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> +Configuration files for window managers and display managers
>> +should be placed in a subdirectory of /etc/X11/
>> +corresponding to the package name due to these programs' tight
>> +integratio
On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> + Configuration files for window managers and display managers
> + should be placed in a subdirectory of /etc/X11/
> + corresponding to the package name due to these programs' tight
> + integration with the mechanisms of the
On Sat, Jun 20 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Sorry about the long delay on the rewrite of the X installation
> directory section. Here's proposed rewording for the whole section.
> How does this look to everyone?
I was wondering if is it OK not to have a transition period for
this change,
Julien Cristau writes:
> Ping Russ? :)
Sorry about the long delay on the rewrite of the X installation
directory section. Here's proposed rewording for the whole section.
How does this look to everyone?
diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
index 43cf4d6..f0e2c6e 100644
--- a/policy.sgml
+++
Julien Cristau writes:
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 05:08:38 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
>> how about:
>>
>>The installation of files into subdirectories of
>>/usr/X11R6/is now prohibited. Include files
>>should be installed into /usr/include/X11/. For
>>f
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 05:08:38 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> how about:
>
> The installation of files into subdirectories of
> /usr/X11R6/is now prohibited. Include files
> should be installed into /usr/include/X11/. For
> files that previously would
Hi!
On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 05:08:38 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> how about:
>
> The installation of files into subdirectories of
> /usr/X11R6/is now prohibited. Include files
Missing space before the “is”.
> should be installed into /usr/include/X11/. For
>
On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 19:57 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I was about to apply this, but then realized that it leaves the following,
> which seems a bit odd and self-contradictory:
>
>
> The installation of files into subdirectories
> of /usr/X11R6/include/X11/ an
Julien Cristau writes:
> I don't know whether to remove just this part, or everything relating to
> X11R6. Opinions?
> diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
> index 300d7f7..5cd463e 100644
> --- a/policy.sgml
> +++ b/policy.sgml
> @@ -8619,22 +8619,8 @@ name ["syshostname"]:
>
>
At 1238611430 time_t, Julien Cristau wrote:
> I don't know whether to remove just this part, or everything relating to
> X11R6. Opinions?
Seconded.
Cheers,
--
Julien Danjou
.''`. Debian Developer
: :' : http://julien.danjou.info
`. `' http://people.debian.org/~acid
`- 9A0D 5FD9 EB42 22F6
On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 11:52:25AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Julien Cristau writes:
>
> > I don't know whether to remove just this part, or everything relating to
> > X11R6. Opinions?
>
> Let's leave the explicit prohibition on X11R6 for at least one more
> release. imake used to be really
Julien Cristau writes:
> I don't know whether to remove just this part, or everything relating to
> X11R6. Opinions?
Let's leave the explicit prohibition on X11R6 for at least one more
release. imake used to be really common and one still occasionally runs
into software that expects this sort
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.8.1.0
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
I don't know whether to remove just this part, or everything relating to
X11R6. Opinions?
Cheers,
Julien
From: Julien Cristau
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 20:29:23 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] Drop requirement to pre-depend on x11-com
23 matches
Mail list logo
