Tapio Lehtonen wrote on 16/05/2006 08:14:
> On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 06:29:52PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
>
> If stable/testing/unstable are branches (or suites), what are Ubuntu,
> DeMuDi, SkoleLinux et al Debian based distributions? I would have
> called them branches, from a version control
On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 09:14:31AM +0300, Tapio Lehtonen wrote:
> If stable/testing/unstable are branches (or suites), what are Ubuntu,
> DeMuDi, SkoleLinux et al Debian based distributions? I would have
> called them branches, from a version control point of view.
They're exactly that: "Debian ba
On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 06:29:52PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> I take the argument of "suite" being used in several tools as an
> argument to increase the weight of "suite" but not a decisive
> argument.
>
> After all, tools can be changed...:-)
>
> The terminology definition could also men
On Sat, May 13, 2006 at 09:54:31AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Policy 2.2 calls them "sections" or "categories" (depending on whether
> you go with the headline or the main text).
Historically, policy's called "main/contrib/non-free" sections, and
"base/admin/mail/etc" subsections; which is c
On Sat, 2006-05-13 at 09:54 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Adam D. Barratt:
>
> > On Tuesday, May 09, 2006 6:26 AM, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> >> Suite has already been used informally. For completeness, you should
> >> also mention "section" (main, contrib, non-free)
> >
* Adam D. Barratt:
> On Tuesday, May 09, 2006 6:26 AM, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> * Christian Perrier:
>>
>>> Most concerns have been raised about my proposed use of "branch" for
>>> talking about stable/testing/unstable. "Suite" seems better...suited,
>>> indeed.
>>
>> Suite h
Christian Perrier wrote on 12/05/2006 18:29:
>>Though AJ is correct in saying that "suite" is by several tools in
>>Debian (apt-utils and dak he mentioned - I don't know about their use of
>>suite - as well as reprepro), I think that from a non-native-english
>>user perspective, "branch" is easier
> Though AJ is correct in saying that "suite" is by several tools in
> Debian (apt-utils and dak he mentioned - I don't know about their use of
> suite - as well as reprepro), I think that from a non-native-english
> user perspective, "branch" is easier to grasp.
And, indeed, as already mentione
Christian Perrier wrote on 10/05/2006 07:00:
>>If there are no strong objections in -project, I'm opened to suggestions
>>about the Right Way to handle the further life of this proposal, to
>>make it alittle bit more "official":
>>
>>-conclude it and post in -devel-announce...:-)
>>
>>-make the dis
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 07:00:56AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> I have to confess that I'm hardly balancing between both. Filipus
> developed an interesting and well argumented explanation to push
> "branch" and I find it convincing...at least as convincing as
> "pro-suite" arguments.
Suite i
On Tuesday, May 09, 2006 6:26 AM, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Christian Perrier:
>
>> Most concerns have been raised about my proposed use of "branch" for
>> talking about stable/testing/unstable. "Suite" seems better...suited,
>> indeed.
>
> Suite has already been used informall
> If there are no strong objections in -project, I'm opened to suggestions
> about the Right Way to handle the further life of this proposal, to
> make it alittle bit more "official":
>
> -conclude it and post in -devel-announce...:-)
>
> -make the discussion wider in -devel and continue it there
> The word "section" already has an assigned meaning in Debian; each
> package has its assigned section defined in its control file,
> i.e. admin, editors, games, libs, mail, etc.
I think that Florian's suggestion was adding a paragraph about
"sections" in my document, not using "sections" for an
On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 07:26:19AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Suite has already been used informally. For completeness, you should
> also mention "section" (main, contrib, non-free) in your more official
> writeup. You can sidestep the question whether sections besides main
> are part of ver
* Christian Perrier:
> Most concerns have been raised about my proposed use of "branch" for
> talking about stable/testing/unstable. "Suite" seems better...suited,
> indeed.
Suite has already been used informally. For completeness, you should
also mention "section" (main, contrib, non-free) in y
Because of the runnign IRC talk, this thread has been quite
short. However, this maybe shows that some egenral agreement pops
about this issue, after all..:-)
Most concerns have been raised about my proposed use of "branch" for
talking about stable/testing/unstable. "Suite" seems better...suited,
16 matches
Mail list logo
