On Sun, May 30, 1999 at 11:23:01PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> >In other words, is it OK to announce the move to FHS on
> >-devel-announce so that developers can start making the necessary
> >changes to their packages?
> We should wait for FHS 2.1, some of the changes in 2.0 like /var/state
> w
Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > >In other words, is it OK to announce the move to FHS on
> > >-devel-announce so that developers can start making the necessary
> > >changes to their packages?
> > We should wait for FHS 2.1, some of the changes in 2.0 like /var/state
> > will be removed.
>
> My feeling
> >In other words, is it OK to announce the move to FHS on
> >-devel-announce so that developers can start making the necessary
> >changes to their packages?
> We should wait for FHS 2.1, some of the changes in 2.0 like /var/state
> will be removed.
Surely we could announce it with a notice say
Previously Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Which is my question: the amendment has been accepted; can we go ahead
> as if it were policy or should we wait until it's actually
> incorporated?
Definitely wait until it's incorporated.
Wichert.
--
On May 30, Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In other words, is it OK to announce the move to FHS on
>-devel-announce so that developers can start making the necessary
>changes to their packages?
We should wait for FHS 2.1, some of the changes in 2.0 like /var/state
will be removed.
-
> On debian-policy, Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What is the status of accepted policy amendments which have not yet
> > been incorporated into policy?
> >
> > In other words, is it OK to announce the move to FHS on
> > -devel-announce so that developers can start making the necess
On debian-policy, Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What is the status of accepted policy amendments which have not yet
> been incorporated into policy?
>
> In other words, is it OK to announce the move to FHS on
> -devel-announce so that developers can start making the necessary
> change
7 matches
Mail list logo