On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 05:50:13PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I think Debian Policy 4.0.0.0 is ready for release.
One thing I was always curious about: is there a reason to use such a
deep versioning scheme?
A shorter version number would make package maintainers life a bit
easie
On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 09:44:16PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Tue, May 02, 2017 at 09:17:21AM -0300, Antonio Terceiro a écrit :
> >
> > One thing I was always curious about: is there a reason to use such a
> > deep versioning scheme?
> >
> > A shorter
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 08:53:17PM +0200, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 12:56:30PM +0200, Ondrej Novy wrote:
> > 2017-08-26 21:49 GMT+02:00 Sean Whitton :
> > > Actually, this depends on which autodep8 module you want to use. I know
> > > that my elpa module runs the tests even i
anging test suites a lot
On the other hand, with the recent increase in autopkgtest/DEP8 usage,
we have been discovering several new needs which often have an impact on
the specification (see e.g. the changelog for the recent 3.2 release),
so freezing DEP-8 right now might hamper the development.
--
Antonio Terceiro
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
gt; If you agree with that, on my part I can take care of finalizing DEP8,
> i.e. marking it as ACCEPTED and adding the disclaimer that further
> changes will happen in the new sub-policy.
Yes, that would work for me.
--
Antonio Terceiro
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ests. Currently, the only defined value is
> > > > autopkgtest.
> > > > +
> > > > +
> > > > +
> > > > + This field is automatically added to Debian source control
> > > > files by
> > >
On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 01:38:32PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 07:35:22PM -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> > >
> > > Anybody Developer who thinks that 1) the Policy is useful and 2) the
> > > Testsuite
> > > field is useful, can
7 matches
Mail list logo
