I believe we need a new section called "gnustep", just
like we have one for gnome and kde.
And then GNUstep packages can be given a proper section,
like "gnustep". x11 is wrong because GNUstep is not depending on x11, x11 is
only one of several possible backends.
|$ apt-cache show gworkspace
|Pac
On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 10:21:38 -0600, Ean Rouse Schuessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
> The thing that you are setting aside is that this policy precisely
> mirrors the current handling of non-free and contrib on
> CD. Furthermore, this approach handles the problem of dealing with
> packages that d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> "e" == ean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
e> The alternative, apparently, will be some sort of external
e> organization that deals with non-free. Inevitably we will have
e> to come to terms with such an organization and draft policy fo
The thing that you are setting aside is that this policy precisely mirrors the
current handling of non-free and contrib on CD. Furthermore, this approach
handles the problem of dealing with packages that do not allow
redistribution. It will be up to these secondary distributors to secure
permis
On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 15:16:37 -0600, Ean Schuessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> The change I suggest is that the non-free and contrib sections be
> protected by certificate authentication. Certificates will be
> distributed to 3rd parties who sign up as an official 3rd party
> distributor of the n
Ean Schuessler wrote:
> Therefore, I propose the following:
>
> Non-free and contrib should stay exactly where they are. They should be in the
> current bug system and in every way, from a development point of view, they
> should be dealt with in the way that we currently deal with them.
>
> The
6 matches
Mail list logo
