Hi
Joey Hess schrieb:
> Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 06, 2000 at 10:43:09AM +0200, Arthur Korn wrote:
> > > Probably it should be clearly stated in policy that the cron.*
> > > scripts may be quiet if no errors are encountered.
> > What do people think of this suggestion (s/may/MUST/)?
>
On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 02:04:24PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> What is the benefit of this new frozen stage, instead of just freezing
> the testing stage?
That people who want to be almost bleeding edge will be held back for
three months of freeze.
Julian
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Santiago Vila wrote:
> > There is no "current practice" yet, really.
> > I propose two different ways to do the freeze:
> >
> > 1. Create frozen between testing and unstable,
> >initially as a copy of testing.
> > 2. Create frozen between testing and unstable,
> >init
bug #71581 asks that lintian complain about packages that fail to ship .la
files as policy 11.2 requires. I am not against this per se.
However, how am I to know that a package should ship a .la file? When policy
refers to libs needing libltdl does it mean they dynamically link it? So I
could u
I would greatly appreciate it if some of you would read the lintian bug list
and supply comments, either in favor of the suggestions or against. Some of
the open bugs need policy updates to fully fix in my opinion.
Also, now is the time to submit your own lintian requests and bugs. I am
preparin
On behalf of the Linux Professional Institute, I invite anyone
interested to participate in our current survey of Linux professionals.
We are in the process of developing our next level of tests for our
certification process. We need the help of Linux professionals and
system adminins to develop a
This suggestion could probably be sent to a number of different
departments of Debian, but it is most likely a general policy decision
on how to support your product. I am recommending to several
distribution packagers that the newsgroup comp.os.linux.* could benefit
from a comp.os.linux.distributi
D, while I don't want to reject the idea out of hand (noting that my
only affiliation with Debian is enjoying it on my own computers, and
spending far too much time helping people on the mail lists) I don't
see any reason for changing our current system.
Perhaps if you would point out the faults o
> "Julian" == Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Julian> On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 02:04:24PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
>> What is the benefit of this new frozen stage, instead of just
>> freezing the testing stage?
Julian> That people who want to be almost bleeding edge wi
On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 01:46:46PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> > "Julian" == Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Julian> On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 02:04:24PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> >> What is the benefit of this new frozen stage, instead of just
> >> freezing the testing stag
* Anthony Towns [010216 19:43]:
> The easiest solution that I can think of (ie, that doesn't cause difficult
> to detect breakage, and that doesn't involve further significant changes
> or too much awkwardness) is, during the freeze, to just upload major
> changes to experimental, and bugfix updat
11 matches
Mail list logo
