Guy Maor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Just put non-free and contrib as part of the section. bash is in the
> base section. xv is in the non-free/graphics section.
Hmm. From a taxonomic standpoint, I don't like this, because now when
I'm talking about sections, I could either mean "non-free" or
Just put non-free and contrib as part of the section. bash is in the
base section. xv is in the non-free/graphics section.
Guy
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I wasn't attempting to imply you were wrong, just pointing out the
> need for consistency.
I agree. I need to be consistent with whatever is in Policy; that's
the bible. I think I've proven my point that the devel-ref is
consistent with Policy.
I'
aph wrote:
> distribution:
>
> A set of packages which make up a general release of Debian. This
> set may either represent an actual released version of Debian, a
> proposed set of packages, or a "vestigal" distribution such as
> "experimental".
>
> examples: stable, uns
On Thu, Oct 01, 1998 at 02:43:29AM -0400, Adam P. Harris wrote:
>
> Branden, in your suggested patch, you say:
>
>
>
> Let me clarify and justify how I am using the terminology. I'm going
> into some depth here, and bringing it up on the Policy list, since
> this is the second time I've been "
Branden, in your suggested patch, you say:
Let me clarify and justify how I am using the terminology. I'm going
into some depth here, and bringing it up on the Policy list, since
this is the second time I've been "corrected" about the use of terms.
distribution:
A set of packages which ma
6 matches
Mail list logo
