On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > What I find very dissapointing is that mdz asked on debian-devel twice
> > for a decision from debian how ubuntu should handle the maintainer Field
> > without any luck:
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2006/01/msg00678.html
> > http://lists.de
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > Debian developers set the Maintainer field to themselves(or a team), when
> > they
> > upload to Debian. The upstream author is only mentioned in the copyright
> > file.
> >
> > Ubuntu should do something similiar. Set the Maintainer field to someo
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > Debian developers set the Maintainer field to themselves(or a team), when
> > they
> > upload to Debian. The upstream author is only mentioned in the copyright
> > file.
> >
> > Ubuntu should do something similiar. Set the Maintainer field to someo
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> In my point of view, maintainer field just need to be change when
> Ubuntu does a non-trivial change on it. Otherwise, at least to me, is
> OK to leave the maintainer field unchanged. Directly imported source
> (that will be just recompiled by Ubuntu)
-us server as well.
This seems confusing. Why not use the language of dpkg, and say it with
depends, suggests, etc?
BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK
Version: 3.12
GCS d- s: a-- c+++ UL P+ L !E W+ M o+ K- W--- !O M- !V PS--
PE++ Y+ PGP++ t* 5++ X+ tv b+ D++ G e h*! !r z?
-END GEEK CODE BLOCK
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Timothy H. Keitt wrote:
> Better yet, lets convince package maintainers not to unnecessarily
> update all their dependencies to the latest libs in unstable so that
> packages can be easily backported with 'apt-get -b source ...' My guess
> is that 60-90% of the packages in uns
On Fri, 3 May 2002, Anthony Towns wrote:
> This is rather non-sensical: all packages /are/ left to the whimsy of
> the dpkg developers. If you don't believe me, I'm sure Wichert or Adam
> will be happy to introduce some random bugs in dpkg 1.10.x to demonstrate.
Just say the word, and we'd be hap
On Sun, 5 May 2002, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > Given these, if someone can tell me if there's
> > anything I can do, Documentation/testing included,
> > I'll feel really nice.
>
> You can do many things :
> - bug fixing, you can look for bugs you are able to fix in the
> release critical bugs ht
On Wed, 28 Aug 2002, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
> Great! I'm glad you know about it. In fact, I'm elated. Now that you
> know, please do something about it. I know you have many machines running
> exim, and I've heard from others that you also run postfix on some
> machines. I really don't care what
On Wed, 28 Aug 2002, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> It is also not right for us to disrupt our list services. Every time
> this argument has come up, there has been a consensus that we need to
> switch - but a refusal to do so without a viable list solution. Look
> at the graphs; the mail volume is
On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Peter Makholm wrote:
> Andres Salomon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > fixing bugs, to simply closing them in the BTS. Sometimes, it's good to
> > keep bugs open in the BTS (tagged w/ wontfix, documenting a problem that
> > other people may bring up; or tagged w/ unreproduca
Before I comment on any of the actual points below, I'd like to make some
statements first.
I have been seen in public reopening bugs that have been incorrectly closed by
bad changelog entries. I have done this with my [EMAIL PROTECTED] hat on.
However,
this wrong. I still feel very strongly o
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Gilbert Martin wrote:
>
> > I want to know if HPT372 raid controler will be support on the next
> > version of debian?
> >
> > Because i have an ABIT KR7A-RAID, and i can't install linux debian on my
> > system.
>
> According to t
On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >>"Matt" == Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Matt> On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 06:06:44PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> >> -A *DRAFT* joint recommendation of the the Technical Committee, the
> >> -Project Leader and the Bug Tracking System
On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Ian Jackson wrote:
> So, in the absence of anything convincing me otherwise, after I think
> everyone's had a say here, I'll go back to the tech ctte very shortly
> and propose it as a resolution there - and obviously it'll have the
> names of the DPL and BTS admins taken off i
On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Adam Heath writes ("Re: why Ian Jackson won't discuss the "disputes" document
> draft with me"):
> > So, Ian tried to rubber stamp something from groups before he ever even sent
> > out feelers to those groups.
On Tue, 5 Nov 2002, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> IMHO this is much more likely to be effective if you first get a
> consensus that there is, in fact, a problem that needs to be dealt
> with. The posts in the other thread suggest you haven't got such an
> agreement.
Exactly. Point number one. Give t
On Tue, 5 Nov 2002, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> Did that message not reach you, or are you just annoyed that I haven't had
> anything particularly useful to inject into the conversation since then?
'useful' in this case is not the common definition, but Ian's own personal
spin. Ie, useful in Ian's wor
On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I think you must have a different experience to me. I've found that
> many developers don't seem to share enough of the context and unspoken
> rules. I think writing them down will help. I also think it might
> produce some useful pressure on those peopl
On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Perhaps I can help.
>
> It seems that, despite marking my document DRAFT etc., I've offended
> some people by in their view giving the impression that the document
> is currently anything more than something I'm working on - with
> people's help, of course,
On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Branden Robinson wrote:
> [-project and -policy, I CCed you because I'm raising issues relevant to
> you; *please* honor the Mail-Followup-To: header!]
Er, why -ctte and the bug only? My response is germane to more than these
groups. In fact, this really doesn't have any pa
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Well, it's been a week and a half and no one has replied, not even a
> member of the BTS administration team.
Joy is a member of the team.
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Craig Sanders wrote:
> this "We're a minority, we're special" card you mention is used by those who
> feel marginalised or persecuted, i.e. in an inferior social position.
>
> i don't think any of the australians in this forum could be accused of feeling
> that :)
Aren't your
I have not voted in this DPL election. I didn't vote in last year's. I think
I only voted in the first one, but even then, I'm not sure.
So, why have I not voted?
1) Lack of time?
The actual act of voting takes no time.
2) Lack of knowing the candidates?
Possible. See below.
3)
On Wed, 7 Apr 2004, Philippe Troin wrote:
> I always vote, probably for the same reasons I vote in my country's
> elections (mostly to prevent the people I disagree with the most to
> get into office) and without having any trust nor hopes in the system
> whatsoever.
Voting in real elections make
On Tue, 14 Sep 2004, A Gibot wrote:
> To Debian. I would like Debian to use LSB 2.0. It would help Linux distros
> like Linspire. Please do this. : - )
We'll get right on it.
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004, Christian Hammers wrote:
> Hello
>
> I got the feeling that starting a discussion Cc'd to debian-admin
> is senseless as they seem too busy to answer.
> (See current mega-threads in debian-private that could have easily
> ended by a single definite statement by the admins)
>
>
27 matches
Mail list logo
