>>"Wichert" == Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Wichert> I do hope you trust is to make changes sensibly. In fact the current
Wichert> reference draft already has some information on the backward and
Wichert> forward compatibility guarantees dpkg gives.
Oh,, absolutely. But
* Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020502 09:54]:
> Previously Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > I understand that dpkg can be used elsewhere than Debian, but
> > it's de facto purpose is to serve as the Debian packaging system.
>
> I'm somewhat interested in having dpkg accepted in other environments
Previously Grant Bowman wrote:
> This is somewhat an aside, but this is already moving away from
> GNU/Debian Linux specific through several ports of GNU/Debian. There
> are the hurd, bsd and win32/cygwin ports already.
I have never been able to find patches for the win32/cygwin port though.
I kn
Is there any reason for this thread to still be on -project? It's entirely
about rewriting debian-policy now, isn't it?
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 03:32:11PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > So if the dpkg reference doesn't document everything that Debian needs
> > in this respect, what is the best
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 03:20:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >>"Julian" == Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Julian> Surely either everything necessary should be in the dpkg reference or
> Julian> everything necessary should be in policy. q
> On the other hand, all packages
가브리엘향수
파운데이션
총알청바지
\25,000
\39,000
\31,500
허락 없이 메일을 보내드려 죄송합니다.
원치 않으시면 옆의 버튼을 눌러주세요.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 07:15:09PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Seems to me that if bug severity is orthagonal to release criticality
People keep saying that, but it's not true [0]. "Release critical bugs"
are those that are serious, grave or critical. "Bugs that will stop the
release of that package
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 02:59:36PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >>"Julian" == Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Julian> People *used* to make that complaint. And if we now move to having a
> Julian> lean policy standards document and a developers reference and a best
> Julian> pro
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 10:09:11AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Part I: The Debian Archive
> 1: DFSG and the sections of the archive (free, non-free, contrib, non-us)
"Components" is a much better word to use here. (And is the word used
everywhere but -policy, just ab
Anthony Towns wrote:
> ``BAM! Science triumphs again!''
> -- http://www.angryflower.com/vegeta.gif
You know I really wish I hadn't looked at that
straight after lunch (even though it was all
vegetable matter :-)
- Richard
/me gets back to work and vows never to follow
On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 08:16:32PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 07:15:09PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Seems to me that if bug severity is orthagonal to release criticality
>
> People keep saying that, but it's not true [0]. "Release critical bugs"
> are those that are ser
* Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020503 09:21]:
> On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 08:16:32PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > There may be subtle differences between the meanings of the various
> > terms, but they are *very* strongly correlated, which is right at the
> > other extreme from orthogonal
On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 09:32:25AM -0700, Grant Bowman wrote:
> * Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020503 09:21]:
> > On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 08:16:32PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > There may be subtle differences between the meanings of the various
> > > terms, but they are *very* strong
Hi all,
As someone other pointed out, the discussion on -project about the
rewrite/improvement of the developer's references was changing topic into a
policy related discussion: so I'm here to forward my proposal.
I want to say that no one better than a new maintainer (I'm only one
OK, I'll bite.
* Anthony Towns [020503 08:38]:
> On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 07:15:09PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Seems to me that if bug severity is orthagonal to release criticality
>
> People keep saying that, but it's not true [0].
I think you and Joey are saying the same thing if you read h
>>""Luca" == "Luca <- De Whiskey's - De Vitis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> writes:
Luca> The dpkg reference should describe what is a dpkg package and
Luca> its internals:
As well as any new or optional input or output, and actions
not required for packaging (dpkg-deb -x details do not need
On Fri, 3 May 2002, Anthony Towns wrote:
> This is rather non-sensical: all packages /are/ left to the whimsy of
> the dpkg developers. If you don't believe me, I'm sure Wichert or Adam
> will be happy to introduce some random bugs in dpkg 1.10.x to demonstrate.
Just say the word, and we'd be hap
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 03:20:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >>"Julian" == Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Julian> On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 02:30:34PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> >>
> >> Refer to a dpkg reference instead and document extra restrictions
>
> Julian> Su
On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 02:13:41PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Luca> At last we need a document that tells maintainers how to build
> Luca> a dpkg package from source, assuming both to be Debian policy
> Luca> compliant (since we choose dpkg as our official packaging
> Luca> tool). Such a
19 matches
Mail list logo
