ion is a more important
reason to avoid the git protocol or http, so if we can come up with a
further change to reflect that it would be better.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
is present in the source package. This
+field may also be used in source package control files if needed in
+other situations.
.. _s5.7:
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
``<`` and ``>`` were previously allowed, but they were
confusingly defined to mean earlier/later or equal rather than
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
s for the
upstream authors. This can be the name of an individual or an
organization, an email address, a web forum or bugtracker, or any other
means to unambiguously identify who to contact to participate in the
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
will fail to build.
+
.. _s-sysvinit:
System run levels and ``init.d`` scripts
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
in favour of the
Homepage: field. It was deliberate that my addition applies to both the
'must' and the 'should' requirements.
Do you disagree with this?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
case I had in mind was where the only information available was a
URI, with no maintainer name or e-mail address. In that case, Homepage:
would duplicate that information, and that's what we're trying to avoid
with this bug.
On reflection I realise that such a case is rather unlikely. But
Hello Ansgar,
On Mon, Aug 28 2017, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> Sean Whitton writes:
>> +This field should not be used for purposes other than satisfying
>> +license requirements to provide full source code.
>
> The DFSG requires source code to be provided too...
Can you sugge
On Tue, Aug 29 2017, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> Wait a second...
Thanks. Will propose another patch for seconding soon.
Policy editors -- please don't push a release until I've done this.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
gt; is correct, although the wording could probably be improved to deal
> with arguments after -e that begin with a hyphen-minus.
>
> “xterm -e foo bar -T baz blah” will call “foo bar -T baz blah”, so
> the -e works like an implicit -- there.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
the .dsc or debian/control (it's probably explained on other
> parts of the chapter that I haven't taken the time to read now though)
source control file == .dsc
source package control file == d/control
Yes, this could be improved.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
eproducible issue: Can I mechanically check policy requirements?
> It is actually worse here: Given a Multi-Arch bug report, it is
> difficult to determine whether your draft supports it due to the lack of
> precision.
Right.
To my mind, the most important ways to achieve readability in this case
are
- avoid repetition
- avoid "probably", "likely" sentences.
When I cut down your draft I was trying to remove repetition. After
reading your e-mail, I now see that not all of it was actually
repetition. Could you make some commits against my branch adding the
information that was not repeated, please?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
init(8) and update-rc.d(8) and I couldn't get
them to generate a postinst that does what I want. It seems you're
expected to use all three of these:
dh_systemd_enable --no-enable
dh_systemd_start --no-start
dh_installinit --no-start
but then after a reboot, a sysvinit system will start the daemon,
AFAICT.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
eference, I will just put commas after each occurrence.
There is no reason to make it consistent. In some circumstances a comma
is appropriate, and in others it is not.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
control: block 601455 by 857452
On Mon, Sep 11 2017, Ian Jackson wrote:
> This should also be fixed with a new update-rc.d rune.
Thank you, Ian and Felipe, for your feedback.
I think the right thing is to wait on #857452.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
n origin. That's what I was taught when
> I was a kid, but I planned on just leaving them plain text (which is
> becoming more and more common).
That convention has definitely gone away.
Thanks for your review efforts.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
l: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
Versions of packages debian-policy depends on:
ii libjs-sphinxdoc 1.5.6-2
debian-policy recommends no packages.
Versions of packages debian-policy suggests:
pn doc-base
-- no debconf information
--
Sean Whitton
h there are plenty in Policy) into the body text.
I don't see what is wrong with this one. Perhaps you could expand.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
accordingly.
As Russ mentioned above, Policy release 4.1.1.0 introduces some new
issues, but those are www-team work and should be very easily resolved,
so I will file a separate bug.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
git/debwww/cron.git/tree/parts/7doc
--
Sean Whitton
From dcb0c69aa246e8076f79d6838cd7eec34d57b815 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sean Whitton
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2017 09:33:08 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Publish single page version of Debian Policy Manual
---
parts/7doc | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 inserti
C_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8),
LANGUAGE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
point to policy.html/, so they would break again if
policy-1.html were copied within that directory. Given #
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
seems like a reasonable use of all four digits.
I would like to reassign this to Lintian, which could say "did you
really mean to use all four?"
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ntainer's control. The specification should entail that the
+architecture-independent packages are buildable on at least two
+architectures. This provides flexibility to the administrators of
+autobuilder infrastructure.
+
.. _s5.7:
User-defined fields
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
vated
to bring their packages into compliance if they're being asked to bring
them into compliance with the latest version of the standard.
[1] http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/toc.htm
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
govern ordinary shared libraries, except that
they must not be installed executable and should be
stripped.
Jonathan, I take it from your reply that you also second this?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
rl policy, and is willing to do the work to handle
these complexities, they should file a new bug against Policy.
Otherwise, let's put that broader issue aside and just fix this
confusing inconsistency about shebangs.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
also fixes that problem.
I'll include both :)
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Sat, Oct 14 2017, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 11:15:10AM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> I am seeking seconds for the following patch.
>
> Thank you for working on this!
Thank you for the review, though I don't believe I need to update my
pa
Hello Helmut,
On Mon, Sep 04 2017, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 02, 2017 at 08:44:14AM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> Rather than introduce the new terminology 'intended interface', which
>> we would definitely have to define, how about something like this:
>
pt runs. It
> +must contain only variable settings and comments in SUSv4 (2016
> +edition) ``sh`` format. It may either be a ``conffile`` or a
> +configuration file maintained by the package maintainer scripts. See
> +:ref:`s-config-files` for more details.
>
> To ensure that vital configurable values are always available, the
> ``init.d`` script should set default values for each of the shell
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
s Reference 5.2? That gives more detail. I am
reluctant to duplicate that in Policy.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
o re-use the same Debian version number?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
pect that this was not exactly what the original submitter was
asking about, but hopefully he'll reply to clarify.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ibutor about the intended
> audience(s) of debian/changelog.
>
> It could be that this bug would be better filed against Developer's
> Reference, if that would be a better location.
Done.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
the formatting seems
> no worse overall than Sphinx's output (if anything it seems better as
> you don't have to wade through the massive TOC to get to actual
> content).
This is a really nice idea. Thank you.
I won't be able to work on this for some weeks but I could
em have already written?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
on is for the user to set EDITOR and PAGER to
select an editor or pager, rather than putting things called 'editor'
and 'pager' into PATH. This seems sensible because 'editor' and 'pager'
are fairly generic terms and a user might have things in ~/bin/editor or
~/bin/pager that don't edit or page, respectively.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello Ian,
On Wed, Nov 08 2017, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Sean Whitton writes ("Bug#880920: Document Rules-Requires-Root
>field"):
>> I wonder if we should just make Policy the new home of the spec that
>> Niels and Guillem have already written?
>
> I certainly would
ger' to be pretty clear names for what they do.
>
> Is there additional information or context I can provide to change
> your mind?
I should be clear that I'm not really objecting, just trying to
understand why the current wording is the way it is.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ackage was prevously uninstalled, the
> | "most-recently-configured-version" string is empty.
Seconded.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
t included, but no additional and
> dangerous requirements for using the document (i.e. works fine without
> JavaScript). Much appreciated.
Thanks!
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
about the dangers of
reuse in such cases: users with the old package installed are not able
to switch to the new package.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
but maybe you don't think it's
sufficient?
Further, in dpkg terminology packages aren't "uninstalled" but they are
"removed". So even if we make a change your wording would not be
advisable.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
g team, they can maintain the virtual packages themselves,
without listing them in Policy.
In light of this, could you confirm that this needs to go into Policy?
I am not familiar with you Vim guys, what with being the co-maintainer
of a dh_* tool for Emacs addons..
--
Sean Whitton
signa
y, the rest of the discussion outside of this bug may be
found here: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2017/11/msg00209.html
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello David,
On Thu, Nov 23 2017, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 05:18:37PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> > "cowsay-offensive". In this situation the "-offensive" package can
>> > be Suggested by the core package(s), but should
Hello Ian,
On Thu, Nov 23 2017, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I'm not wedded to this second half of the sentence.
Is this a proposal/seconding of the modified patch?
This bug needs one more second to be applied to the Policy repo.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
as been for some time.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ing like "please make debhelper
install NEWS as NEWS.gz not as changelog.gz."
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
he patch.
We're trying to reduce the number of footnotes in Policy, but in this
case I can't see a place to insert the text without interrupting the
flow. I'm going ahead and adding it as a footnote, but I would
appreciate any suggestions for where else the text could go.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
hat this is excessive
> bureaucracy. You do know it's self-imposed ?
Indeed, I think you have a point, but I cannot imagine an alternative
procedure that wouldn't leave package maintainers feeling beholden to
the Policy Editors in a way that would be bad for the project.
--
Sean Whitto
ake an incompatible change. It just creates
work for people. Adding a strictly optional field can be done without
doing this.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
y...)
Agreed, we need some clarity.
wanna-build team / Release Team / Backports Team: exactly which buildds
ignore alternative dependencies? We want to include this in an
(existing) Policy footnote.
Thanks.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
es. If you read the Developer's Reference, d/changelog is meant to be
"user visible" changes, and NEWS.Debian really urgent user visible
changes.
Which is different from the distinction between the upstream CHANGELOG
and NEWS distinction we've been working with in recent e-m
vides.
> To help backporters, I have used this functionality before and
> backporters have uploaded the package as-is to a backports dist that
> didn't include 'a'. The package built against 'b'. Was this an
> autobuilder bug?
The backports autobuilders pa
It
seems odd to have a standard location for upstream changelogs but not
for upstream NEWS/release notes.
Or perhaps we should drop the standard location for upstream changelogs.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
txt]).
> ---
I don't think this really answers my concern that it is confusing for
/debian-policy/ and /debian-policy/index.html not to be the same page.
How about renaming index.html to policy.html and policy-1.html to
index.html on the web mirrors?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Fri, Dec 01 2017, Sean Whitton wrote:
> How about renaming index.html to policy.html and policy-1.html to
> index.html on the web mirrors?
Sorry, this was a stupid suggestion and won't work. There are
references to index.html in the chapters.
--
Sean Whitton
si
``/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-1``,
> ``/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2``,
> ``/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-3``,
Seconded.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
s in
common-licenses makes editing d/copyright easier for package
maintainers. Previously this was overridden by disc space concerns but
that might not make sense anymore.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ldn't let that block adding CC0 just because it is not the
most common CC license.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
e try to re-use existing bugs, such as #795402. Otherwise we just
have to spend time merging them.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
gt; +
> .. [#]
> See the file ``upgrading-checklist`` for information about policy
> which has changed between different versions of this document.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Sat, Dec 09 2017, Bill Allombert wrote:
> What work are you referring to ?
Longer copyright files are more painful to edit.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
as I'm aware, it
> isn't documented anywhere *why* it is required. ftp team: please could
> you clarify this?
Indeed. Let's not go any further with this bug until we get an answer
for that.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
est a tag "Files-Binary" in copyright-format to fulfill
> this situation.
What would the definition of this field be? It is not clear from your
example.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
his. But please let me know
if I've misunderstood.
[1] https://bugs.debian.org/882723#35
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
age cannot comply with such requirements.
Can you explain why the Built-Using: field doesn't satisfy this? AIUI,
this case is precisely what the Built-Using: field is for.
(I thought that this wasn't an issue with the Expat license, anyway;
only the GPL, but I'm not sure)
tagged moreinfo until the above are determined. Per
the Policy Changes Process the bug may be closed if the info is not
forthcoming in 30 days; don't be discouraged by this, because you can
always file a new bug when
- we have figured out what the best practice actually is here
- some packages
control: forcemerge 795402 -1
control: forcemerge 795402 884225
Hello,
On Tue, Dec 12 2017, Markus Koschany wrote:
> as discussed on debian-devel [1]
Please check for pre-existing books! Thanks.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
feature we should preserve (and
might be legally required to preserve).
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ice and
> when necessary start a GR for reasons of legitimacy.
If we think this issue is important enough to spend money on that. I am
not convinced it is.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
s issue, both
License: and License-Grant: can be used; for those who are not, such as
yourself, you can just keep using License: as you have been doing.
There is no consensus on either of these options so we're making both
possible.
Does this weaken your disagreement?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
you can do that if you do in fact retain the key).
The whole thing needs rewriting, I suspect, for streamlining that has
occurred in the past three months.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
I suggest is that you write a summary of the current proposal
addressed to the FTP masters -- your original proposal plus mine, if you
agree with what I've written in this e-mail -- CCing this bug and saying
that the proposal is blocked because it needs their input.
Thanks!
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ow we need a patch to the Policy Manual.
I suggest we use "should not" rather than "must not" as there may be
cases unknown to us where 'su -' is needed.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
project.
I requested 'dbnpolicy' for us.
I'll take care of adding push access for the other Policy Editors and
copying our repo to salsa.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
rs: I added a pre-receive hook to prevent accidental pushes
to the old alioth repo.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
; is
> - removed. Only the dynamic linker is allowed to use this directory.
> + removed. Only the dynamic linker and libc are allowed to use this
> + directory.
>
> 4. The requirement for object files, internal binaries, and
> libraries,
> including ``libc.so.*``, to b
nst newer versions of their build dependencies.
+
.. [#]
The relations ``<`` and ``>`` were previously allowed, but they were
confusingly defined to mean earlier/later or equal rather than
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
showstopper.
Do you recall if we've already reported this upstream, Russ? If not, I
would suggest we report it upstream and set ourselves a deadline; if the
bug is not fixed by that date, we abandon singlehtml on our mirrors.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
>
>> ?
>
> This wording seems fine to me. Seconded. (I volunteer to turn this
> into a Git change if it gets enough seconds.)
Likewise seconded.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
deserves a section of its own?)
I think we would be fine just to continue to sprinkle nudges towards
debhelper tools at the relevant points in the Policy Manual.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
claim that the service
+was started.
+
Note that if your package changes runlevels or priority, you may have to
remove and recreate the links, since otherwise the old links may
persist. Refer to the documentation of ``update-rc.d``.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
> something closer to "In particular, it should not be added solely to
> enable finding packages that should be rebuilt [...]".
Indeed that was the intent. I've s/used/added solely/ twice.
> That said, seconded.
Thanks for the review!
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Policy is that package maintainers may see it and
> just document that approach if they get questions from users about
> disabling their service.
Added something (non-normative) about this, thanks.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
been pointed out
that the ftp-masters frequently reject packages that summarise in this
way, which I suspect the reason why Markus isn't considering this
feature of the copyright format helpful in addressing his concerns.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
the first paragraph of the copyright file, saying
that foo-N+ means foo version N or any later version of the license at
your option.
Let's not rush choosing how we're going to provide this hint to the
local admin. We want to be sure we get this decision right because it
will be difficult
7;s not discuss the proposal to add all
known DFSG-free licenses to common-licenses. Whether that proposal is
valid depends on our criteria for inclusion, so let's stick to hashing
our those criteria in this bug.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
nd if they can't, that's a bug in uscan.
We're not rendering those packages buggy with this change, because it's
fine to continue to have a get-orig-source target. We're just reducing
the documented interfaces of packages a bit based on current trends,
which is useful for newcomers to Debian.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ving cruft from the Policy merely
because there /might/ be a case where the cruft is the only way to do
something.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
icit "See the README file in that
directory for more information." to the motd addition. Otherwise, LGTM.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
sion bump because we are adding to /etc/motd instead.
> A final more general comment -- please include the people who write
> code based on the copyright-format specification in the discussion of
> specification changes and include them early on. (cme, lintian,
> sources.d.o, python-deb
tarball:
> bad; I don't really want this scheme supported in uscan; better left
> it here only.
Wow. Thanks for sharing this!
Previously, I neglected to respond to the latter part of Bill's message:
On Fri, Dec 29 2017, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 06
here is
another improvement you could make to this package." Working through
the ugprading checklist almost always falls into the latter category.
Also relevant here is Enrico's talk at DebConf17,[1] where he cautioned
against manipulating volunteers into doing work. Requiring
his field, or it should not be a Lintian
error when it is not present.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
some additional work is likely to have the same negative effect as
requiring them to do it. This was a central message of Enrico's talk.
Maybe I better word is "encourage"..
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
for the upgrading checklist
if every change has an accompanying Lintian tag or MBF. Perhaps you
could rephrase this remark about NMUs.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
control: tag -1 +pending
Hello,
On Thu, Jan 11 2018, Sebastian Rasmussen wrote:
> While reading the Debian policy document I was inspired to look for
> typos. Attached is a patch that fixes the ones that I found.
Thanks for this.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
101 - 200 of 727 matches
Mail list logo
