Bug#92423: PROPOSAL] renaming of debian/rules file

2001-04-06 Thread Brian Russo
On Sun, Apr 01, 2001 at 09:21:01PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > Peter Palfrader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Sun, 01 Apr 2001, Bas Zoetekouw wrote: > > > > > Hi Taral! > > > > > > You wrote: > > > > > > > It should most certainly be debian/rulz, not rulez. > > > > > > Why not m

Bug#92423: PROPOSAL] renaming of debian/rules file

2001-04-06 Thread Brian Russo
On Sun, Apr 01, 2001 at 10:23:59PM +0400, Peter Novodvorsky wrote: > Moshe Zadka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Sun, 1 Apr 2001 09:59:14 -0300, Henrique M Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > So, I propose we make clear that we are indeed '1337 and rename the > > > debian/rule

Bug#92423: PROPOSAL] renaming of debian/rules file

2001-04-02 Thread Josip Rodin
On Mon, Apr 02, 2001 at 12:45:54AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote: > > > > It should most certainly be debian/rulz, not rulez. > > > > > > Why not make it d3b1an/rulz, then? > > > > d3b14n/ru|z seems like a good choice. > > Although the | could cause fun were someone to forget to quote it ;-) Yeah,

Bug#92423: PROPOSAL] renaming of debian/rules file

2001-04-01 Thread Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Peter Palfrader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, 01 Apr 2001, Bas Zoetekouw wrote: > > > Hi Taral! > > > > You wrote: > > > > > It should most certainly be debian/rulz, not rulez. > > > > Why not make it d3b1an/rulz, then? > > d3b14n/ru|z seems like a good choice. No, no. d3b!4n/ru|z i

Bug#92423: PROPOSAL] renaming of debian/rules file

2001-04-01 Thread Julian Gilbey
On Sun, Apr 01, 2001 at 09:42:10PM +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote: > On Sun, 01 Apr 2001, Bas Zoetekouw wrote: > > > Hi Taral! > > > > You wrote: > > > > > It should most certainly be debian/rulz, not rulez. > > > > Why not make it d3b1an/rulz, then? > > d3b14n/ru|z seems like a good choice. Al

Bug#92423: PROPOSAL] renaming of debian/rules file

2001-04-01 Thread Peter Palfrader
On Sun, 01 Apr 2001, Bas Zoetekouw wrote: > Hi Taral! > > You wrote: > > > It should most certainly be debian/rulz, not rulez. > > Why not make it d3b1an/rulz, then? d3b14n/ru|z seems like a good choice. yours, pe

Bug#92423: PROPOSAL] renaming of debian/rules file

2001-04-01 Thread Bas Zoetekouw
Hi Taral! You wrote: > It should most certainly be debian/rulz, not rulez. Why not make it d3b1an/rulz, then? -- Kind regards, +---+ | Bas Zoetekouw | Si l'on sait exactement ce | ||

Bug#92423: PROPOSAL] renaming of debian/rules file

2001-04-01 Thread Peter Novodvorsky
Moshe Zadka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, 1 Apr 2001 09:59:14 -0300, Henrique M Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > So, I propose we make clear that we are indeed '1337 and rename the > > debian/rules file to debian/rulez. Anyone who cannot see the benefits of > > the added c00l

Bug#92423: PROPOSAL] renaming of debian/rules file

2001-04-01 Thread Taral
On Sun, Apr 01, 2001 at 09:59:14AM -0300, Henrique M Holschuh wrote: > The transition from the old to the new system can be easily performed by > including a test in dpkg-source, so that a debian/rules -> debian/rulez > symlink is added to the source deb if the debian/rules file is not present > an

Bug#92423: PROPOSAL] renaming of debian/rules file

2001-04-01 Thread Moshe Zadka
On Sun, 1 Apr 2001 09:59:14 -0300, Henrique M Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, I propose we make clear that we are indeed '1337 and rename the > debian/rules file to debian/rulez. Anyone who cannot see the benefits of > the added c00lness effect such a change would bring is not fit to b

Bug#92423: [PROPOSAL] renaming of debian/rules file

2001-04-01 Thread Henrique M Holschuh
Package: debian-policy Version: 3.5.2.0 Severity: wishlist It is about time we recognize the truth. We have been constantly called as the most elitist of the GNU/Linux distribuitons, and this is true. So, I propose we make clear that we are indeed '1337 and rename the debian/rules file to debian/