Hello,
On Fri 24 Jan 2025 at 02:00pm +01, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 12:08:55PM +0000, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> control: tag -1 + wontfix
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> The existing text you're removing was carefully worked out with
>&
t
they are (or, you want to know that there aren't any options, so you
can't solve your problem that way) but it's less bad than for CLI
programs. So maybe we could weaken the language down from 'should' for
GUI programs.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
it in the source is fine, people can 'git grep' for what they
want to edit. But yeah, keeping them installed in the same places in
the .deb sounds sensible.
> - While moving things around, I also wondered whether it might be
> cleaner to move all fhs stuff under a new fhs/ subdir.
As the file names already have 'fhs' in them, I'd prefer to leave them
in the source root.
> - Should I work off master or next?
Definitely 'next' for the moving around, though if you have minor fixes
that could go onto master immediately, send them in.
Thank you again.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
re in their Debian distribution. This is rather depressing both from
> the Debian point of view and the upstream point of view.
> I anticipate the problem is only going to become worse.
>
> I do not know what we can do about it.
I believe all these observations to be correct.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
the html.tar is; can you say more?
>
> ISTR the debian-policy binary package might have shipped the SGML and
> then the XML sources as an html.tar.gz, but this got disabled at some
> point, so these are not shipped any longer in the .deb. But the build
> system still generates them.
>
> (The changes already have commit refs for when these got disabled.)
Okay. Sounds like just an oversight, then.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
y validate this.
We've had that restriction in place for a long time, so that package is
just buggy, I think.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
cy, which I quote
> below:
I think that Guillem makes a good point. If there's no alternative,
though, an example that might get out-of-date is probably better than no
example.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
isn't great text both for all the not-intended-to-be-edited
stuff we have shipped there, plus the /usr-and-overrides thing more
recently. Thanks for the write-up.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ed
> first. But I ask you to move the default change to the dpkg-build-api
> thingy instead.
Policy has to go through binary-NEW in order to be released. So there
isn't a quick fix here.
This bug does not count as RC just because Debian upload bureaucracy
hasn't been perfo
ywords.
Thanks, you're right. Here is a revised patch.
Could you review and re-second it, please?
--
Sean Whitton
From 52e69933c77b427a3285617eb0dee2cbaaf66d38 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sean Whitton
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2025 19:14:06 +
Subject: [PATCH] Document Git-Tag-Tagger and
supposed to behave if they cannot understand parts of the
> information in the header?
Surely that would depend on what the tool was trying to achieve and
couldn't be specified in general?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Thu 20 Feb 2025 at 09:40am -07, Sam Hartman wrote:
>>>>>> "Ian" == Ian Jackson writes:
>
> Ian> Sean Whitton writes ("Bug#1091868: debian-policy: Document
> Ian> Git-Tag-Tagger and Git-Tag-Info fields"):
>
Hello,
On Fri 21 Feb 2025 at 04:33pm -07, Sam Hartman wrote:
>>>>>> "Sean" == Sean Whitton writes:
>
> Sean> It's from the VALIDSIG line as documented here:
> Sean> <https://github.com/gpg/gnupg/blob/master/doc/DETAILS>.
&
Hello,
On Fri 21 Feb 2025 at 04:20pm GMT, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Sean Whitton writes ("Re: Bug#1091868: debian-policy: Document Git-Tag-Tagger
> and Git-Tag-Info fields"):
>> It's from the VALIDSIG line as documented here:
>> <https://github.com/gpg/gnupg/blob
uld you consider proposing a patch to Policy?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
t not install
--8<---cut here---end--->8---
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Wed 05 Mar 2025 at 06:09pm -05, Jeremy Bícha wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 9:02 PM Sean Whitton wrote:
>> I was exercising my authority as DPL Delegate to go ahead and undo the
>> change quickly despite opposition, because I saw the violation of
>> proc
Hello,
On Wed 26 Feb 2025 at 02:22pm +01, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> Seconded. Thanks for dealing with this, sorry for the trouble.
No problem, I'm glad we kind of got a transition going.
> Editorial: s/a exception/an exception/?
Thanks, fixed.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Hello,
On Wed 26 Feb 2025 at 01:41pm GMT, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Feb 2025 at 20:33:46 +0800, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> I believe that there is a procedural issue which trumps the substantive
>> issue about merging or not merging [/usr/bin with /usr/games]
> ...
&g
ability is important get documented in Policy first. Given that
> documenting something with zero current usage is, perhaps, a departure from
> how Policy discussions often go, it's likely worth being explicit that this is
> what is being done in this case and that it is acceptable
lpful reply to this bug, btw.)
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Thu 27 Feb 2025 at 06:52am -05, Jeremy Bícha wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 7:36 AM Sean Whitton wrote:
>> Therefore I am seeking seconds for the following patch.
>
> Sean, I appreciate the work you do on Debian Policy. I can understand
> your desire to want to
ain.
I don't see how the current text would be inadequate, though. For a
package like util-linux, a discussion on debian-devel would result in a
resounding "no".
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
control: tag -1 + pending
Hello,
Right, yes, I meant to type that '1' in the middle.
Thanks for confirming. Applied for the next release.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
is. How about
Dynamically allocated subordinate user ids. See subuid(5).
``useradd`` in its default configuration (and thus ``adduser``)
automatically allocate a range of 65536 of these to each new
non-system user created.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Mon 17 Mar 2025 at 10:40am +01, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> This is a lot better than my initial text.
Cool, would you care to second it?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Mon 17 Mar 2025 at 10:49am +01, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> * Sean Whitton [250317 03:32]:
>>On Sun 16 Mar 2025 at 02:04pm +01, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
>>> These ranges are in the range currently documented in policy 9.2.2
>>> as:
>>>
>&
701 - 727 of 727 matches
Mail list logo
