On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 03:49:15PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> As a consequence, I propose the following wording for the paragraph of
> developers-reference about that:
>beginning of release cycles), the lower release number higher
^
pe, 2008-09-05 kello 10:00 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli kirjoitti:
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:20:44AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > on http://dep.debian.net, using the same license as DEP0, but
> > dep.debian.net is down currently, so I can't check what the license is
> > :)
>
> dep.debian.net w
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:20:44AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> on http://dep.debian.net, using the same license as DEP0, but
> dep.debian.net is down currently, so I can't check what the license is
> :)
dep.debian.net was just an alias for http://dep.alioth.debian.org. I
don't know what happene
On Friday 22 August 2008 15:49, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Conclusion: we need a way to version stable/testing uploads that avoids
> this.
While I'm not convinced that it's a pressing issue that needs resolving, if
people badly want it I'll use the new system.
> I think that instead, we should use
On 19/08/08 at 21:20 +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> >If you upload a package to testing or stable, you sometimes need
> >to "fork" the version number tree. This is the case for security
> >uploads, for example. For this, a version of the form +debXYuZ
> >should be used, where X is
On 21/08/08 at 02:09 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 06:20:47PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 18:33:01 -0300, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
> > > The change is needed, since the BTS needs to know if the bugs are closed
> > > in that version or not.
>
>
On 21/08/2008, at 8:56 PM, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
My concept of the package changelog is to give a chronological
account of
the changes that happened to the package.
Right...
What is the problem with documenting which versions were actually
present
in the archive?
That it conflicts wi
On Wed, August 20, 2008 14:14, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Say stable and testing have 1.0-1. Sid has 1.0-2.
> stable-security has 1.0-1+etch1 The maintainer wants to upload something to
> t-p-u. If we had a codename that sorted before etch we would be screwed.
I don't think we're "screwed", rather t
Le Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:56:14AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst a écrit :
>
> My concept of the package changelog is to give a chronological account of
> the changes that happened to the package.
Hi Thijs,
isn't it anyway impossible to represent linearly the life tree of a
package? Imagine that the ve
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 06:20:47PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 18:33:01 -0300, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > The change is needed, since the BTS needs to know if the bugs are closed
> > in that version or not.
> > Could you propose an alternative wording for the following p
On Thu, August 21, 2008 10:33, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 01:33:16PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
>> But perhaps we need another mechanism to signal this. Consecutive
>> uploads to the same distribution should not cause previously present
>> version entries to disappear from t
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 01:33:16PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> That has the drawback of not notifying the maintainer explicitly directly
> after (or even before) the upload.
> But perhaps we need another mechanism to signal this. Consecutive uploads to
> the same distribution should not caus
On 20/08/08 at 17:15 +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > After a long delay, here is a final call for reviews and comments for
> > DEP1.
>
> Hi! A meta-issue: It would be nice if your DEP1 was freely licensed. I
> didn't see a license sta
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 07:35:51PM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > It works well except when the same package version is in two consecutive
> > release.
> > 1.0-1+sarge1 > 1.0-1+etch1 when we really want the opposite. That's why
> > this scheme was invented. I agree that
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> It works well except when the same package version is in two consecutive
> release.
>
> 1.0-1+sarge1 > 1.0-1+etch1 when we really want the opposite. That's why
> this scheme was invented. I agree that it's not very nice though but i
> couldn't find anything "cleaner".
Sh
Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> After a long delay, here is a final call for reviews and comments for
> DEP1.
Hi! A meta-issue: It would be nice if your DEP1 was freely licensed. I
didn't see a license statement in your text, could one be added?
Thanks,
/Simon
--
To UNS
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> But perhaps we need another mechanism to signal this. Consecutive uploads to
> the same distribution should not cause previously present version entries to
> disappear from the changelog. Maybe the archive can reject an upload that
> misses a changel
On Wednesday 20 August 2008 10:06, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 20/08/08 at 09:38 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> > > The past weeks I had several encounters with the situation that a
> > > maintainer completely overlooked and NMU and uploaded a newer v
On 20/08/08 at 09:38 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> > The past weeks I had several encounters with the situation that a
> > maintainer
> > completely overlooked and NMU and uploaded a newer version without
> > acknowledging the previous NMU, thereby
ke, 2008-08-20 kello 09:38 +0200, Raphael Hertzog kirjoitti:
> The maintainer is still king and if he decides that the NMU was not a good
> idea, he would have no other choice than skipping a revision in the
> changelog. That would be confusing.
It would, however, make things a bit more explicit t
On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> The past weeks I had several encounters with the situation that a maintainer
> completely overlooked and NMU and uploaded a newer version without
> acknowledging the previous NMU, thereby reintroducing the problem the NMU
> addressed. This happened t
Hi,
Sorry for breaking the thread and chiming in late, I was until recently not
aware of this thread and not subscribed to debian-project. I hope my comments
can still be considered.
>The version must be the version of the last upload, plus +nmuX,
>This special versioning is needed to
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 18:33:01 -0300, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> The change is needed, since the BTS needs to know if the bugs are closed
> in that version or not.
>
> Could you propose an alternative wording for the following paragraph?
>
> When a package has been NMUed, the maintainer should ac
On 15/08/08 at 22:59 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 01:22:28AM -0300, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > > o Upload fixing only release-critical bugs older than 7 days:
> > > >2 days
> > >
> > > > o Upload fixing only release-critical and important bugs: 5
> > >
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 01:22:28AM -0300, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > o Upload fixing only release-critical bugs older than 7 days:
> > >2 days
> >
> > > o Upload fixing only release-critical and important bugs: 5
> > >days
> >
> > > o Other NMUs: 10 days
> > Not c
On 14/08/08 at 10:58 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 07:28:53PM -0300, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >Before doing an NMU, consider the following questions:
>
> > o Do you really fix bugs in your NMU? Fixing cosmetic issues,
> >or changing the packaging style in N
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 09:00:25AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > > This was covered in a thread around
> > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2005/01/msg00360.html
> > This thread seems to establish that you're in a small minority with this
> > opinion.
> Well, I was using it to give a reasonabl
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 07:28:53PM -0300, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>Before doing an NMU, consider the following questions:
> o Do you really fix bugs in your NMU? Fixing cosmetic issues,
>or changing the packaging style in NMUs is discouraged,
>unless it is required to fix bu
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 04:28:36PM +0200, Luipher Fhang wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 11:35 AM, Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I think it is reasonable to first fix the bug (no gender neutrality)
>
> When you use http://code.google.com/ in combination with obscene language
> yo
On Thu, 14 Aug 2008, MJ Ray wrote:
> Even so, why should language style be a weight-of-numbers thing?
Interestingly, that's exactly what language and style is about.
English is plastic, and as the usage of people who use english
changes, so does the language and its style.
Don Armstrong
--
Nea
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 11:35 AM, Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think it is reasonable to first fix the bug (no gender neutrality)
When you use http://code.google.com/ in combination with obscene language
you find a lot of code comments that found their way into debian packages.
H
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 09:00:25AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> I'm disappointed if the docs have been patched quietly to expand the
> "singular they" bug. There's almost no need for it. When reasonably
> possible, please phrase things in such a way to avoid assuming gender,
> or switch some examples.
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > No, it hasn't. It is used naturally for indeterminates. Using it for
> > singulars sounds stilted and contrived. The developer is clearly not
> > an indeterminate.
>
> It's a single person with indeterminate gender,
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It's a single person with indeterminate gender, which is exactly the use
> case for the epicene they. I believe you're simply wrong here. This
> supposedly stilted and contrived construct routinely goes unremarked and
> unnoticed by native English speak
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 11:16:44AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> This thread seems to establish that you're in a small minority with this
> opinion.
I'll weigh in on MJ's side and also concede that it's a small minority,
unfortunately.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No, it hasn't. It is used naturally for indeterminates. Using it for
> singulars sounds stilted and contrived. The developer is clearly not
> an indeterminate.
It's a single person with indeterminate gender, which is exactly the use
case for the epicene the
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 11:21:09AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > However, balance of examples and judicious use of "one" and "a
> > > developer" would be better than butchering the English language and
> > > making the do
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > However, balance of examples and judicious use of "one" and "a
> > developer" would be better than butchering the English language and
> > making the document more confusing by using "they" to stand for a
> > definite
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> However, balance of examples and judicious use of "one" and "a
> developer" would be better than butchering the English language and
> making the document more confusing by using "they" to stand for a
> definite singular quantity without context.
"They" has be
Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Roberto C. Sánchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 08:16:56PM -0300, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > The whole developers-reference is written in a non-gender-neutral
> > > manner. If there's consensus that it's a good idea, I would prefer
Roberto C. Sánchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 08:16:56PM -0300, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >
> > The whole developers-reference is written in a non-gender-neutral
> > manner. If there's consensus that it's a good idea, I would prefer
> > if the whole devref was converted a
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 08:16:56PM -0300, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
> The whole developers-reference is written in a non-gender-neutral
> manner. If there's consensus that it's a good idea, I would prefer if
> the whole devref was converted at once, instead of converting only this
> part.
>
Any par
* Lucas Nussbaum [Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:16:56 -0300]:
> > Also, there are a couple places in the document where language it's not
> > gender-neutral. If you care about that, I have a diff to move the
> > document to use the singular they, please let me know if you're
> > interested.
> The whole dev
On 12/08/08 at 20:44 +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Lucas Nussbaum [Mon, 11 Aug 2008 19:28:53 -0300]:
>
> Hi, these are some other, mostly minor bits:
>
> >The version must be the version of the last upload, plus +nmuX,
> >where X is a counter starting at 1. If the last upload was also
>
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 10:33:47PM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> And the disadvantage of being less compact.
len('1.2.3-1+nmu1') - len('1.2.3-1.1') = 3
len('1:1.0.rc2svn20080706-0.1') - len('1.2.3-1') = 17
are we really discussing the disadvantages of *3* extra characters when
we have version
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Lucas Nussbaum [Mon, 11 Aug 2008 19:28:53 -0300]:
>
> >The version must be the version of the last upload, plus +nmuX,
>
> I already objected to this in the past, and I'm loudly objecting again
> now. Some people on IRC shared this objection; I'm
* Stefano Zacchiroli [Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:18:40 -0300]:
> In addition, it has the advantage of being clearer,
And the disadvantage of being less compact. Who do we /need/ to make it
clearer for? Who that wouldn't be familiar with the old syntax could
/benefit/ from this explicitness?
(In the old
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 08:37:17PM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> >The version must be the version of the last upload, plus +nmuX,
>
> I already objected to this in the past, and I'm loudly objecting again
> now. Some people on IRC shared this objection; I'm opening a subthread
> to see if I'm
* Lucas Nussbaum [Mon, 11 Aug 2008 19:28:53 -0300]:
Hi, these are some other, mostly minor bits:
>The version must be the version of the last upload, plus +nmuX,
>where X is a counter starting at 1. If the last upload was also
>an NMU, the counter should be increased. For example, if
* Lucas Nussbaum [Mon, 11 Aug 2008 19:28:53 -0300]:
>The version must be the version of the last upload, plus +nmuX,
I already objected to this in the past, and I'm loudly objecting again
now. Some people on IRC shared this objection; I'm opening a subthread
to see if I'm alone on this, or wh
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
I'm interested both in ACKs and suggestions for changes.
I second the proposal (I like better if you include the
Jonas proposal about README.source).
ciao
cate
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 08:20:46AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> How about just sneak in a recommendation to check debian/README.Source
> for any hints about specific packaging routines to be aware of?
Nice idea, as it would address any other potential hints from
maintainers to NMUers, possibl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 02:14:06AM -0300, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>After that, we can have a discussion about:
>- Should people be encouraged to commit the changes they make in an NMU
> to the package's Vcs?
>- Should people be encouraged to commit any
On 12/08/08 at 10:06 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 07:28:53PM -0300, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> >
> > After a long delay, here is a final call for reviews and comments for
> > DEP1.
>
>
> Hi Lucas,
>
> First of all, since we already dedicated a lot of time to find
> com
Le Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 07:28:53PM -0300, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
>
> After a long delay, here is a final call for reviews and comments for
> DEP1.
Hi Lucas,
First of all, since we already dedicated a lot of time to find
compromise on the text, let me make clear that I do not object to it,
tha
Hi,
After a long delay, here is a final call for reviews and comments for
DEP1. I've wrote it as a patch to developers-reference, and extracted
the relevant part on:
http://people.debian.org/~lucas/nmudep/pkgs.html
If you prefer to read the diff, go to:
http://people.debian.org/~lucas/nmudep/nmu.d
56 matches
Mail list logo
