Here's what's been happening on debian-policy this week.
Do we have consensus on any of the listed amendments? Let me know..
Note: for details of the policy process, see
http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/policy/ch3.html. Also, this summary is
available on the web at http://kitenet.net/~joey/policy-
Anthony Towns writes:
> And make dpkg's ordering rules more strict, for no good reason.
No good reason? How about the very good reason that these packages
are essential, and if they aren't handled strictly and carefully, we
have problems. As we've just seen.
But ok, if you don't like that, th
[following up my own post to cover some points I missed]
Chris Waters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Anthony Towns writes:
> > And make dpkg's ordering rules more strict, for no good reason.
> No good reason? How about the very good reason that these packages
> are essential, and if they aren'
3 matches
Mail list logo
