Hi,
Le 09/09/2014 09:24, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> a source of confusion which nobody really was aware about.
Yet, I thought it had already been pointed before, and indeed:
<20130103072801.gc28...@x230-buxy.home.ouaza.com>
> Le 03/01/2013 03:28, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
>> On Thu, 03 Jan 2013
Hi Simon,
On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 03:29:48PM +0200, Simon Kainz wrote:
>
> thank you also. Sorry, but I didn't want to create some additional
> work for you (Charles). Just wanted to clear this up.
IMHO your work was definitely valuable since it enabled us to get rid of
a source of confusion whi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Am 2014-09-08 12:26, schrieb Andreas Tille:
> Hi Charles,
>
> On Sat, Sep 06, 2014 at 07:18:33PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
>>
>> On https://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamMetadata I moved the Homepage
>> and Watch fields to a new section, « Fields that
Hi Charles,
On Sat, Sep 06, 2014 at 07:18:33PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
>
> On https://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamMetadata I moved the Homepage and Watch
> fields to a new section, « Fields that are not recommended ».
I noticed the change and I like it. :-)
Thanks for your effort for upstream/
Le Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 11:46:14AM +0200, Andreas Tille a écrit :
>
> I see your good intention to assemble data clearly related to upstream
> in one place but pragmatically we need to accept that our tools are not
> using the data at this place and unused data tend to bitrot. Since
> there would
Hi Charles,
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 07:41:13PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
>
> If the final result is extra work and confusion, how about adding a comment
> that this field should be avoided for the moment ?
Sounds reasonable (same for Watch field).
> In any case, the Homepage field of debian
Le Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 11:57:25AM +0200, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 07:21:51AM +0200, Simon Kainz wrote:
> > ...
> > But, maybe i got this completely wrong
>
> ... or it is not the best idea to duplicate data at different places.
Hi all,
In the past, I added Homepage
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 07:21:51AM +0200, Simon Kainz wrote:
> ...
> But, maybe i got this completely wrong
... or it is not the best idea to duplicate data at different places.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-requ...@lists.debian.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Am 2014-09-03 05:11, schrieb David Prévot:
> Hi,
>
> Le 02/09/2014 17:04, Simon Kainz a écrit :
>> mira upstream-metadata:
>> http://www.chevreux.org/projects_mira.html control-file:
>> http://chevreux.org/projects_mira.html diff size: 34 lines
>
>
Hi,
Le 02/09/2014 17:04, Simon Kainz a écrit :
> mira
> upstream-metadata: http://www.chevreux.org/projects_mira.html
> control-file: http://chevreux.org/projects_mira.html
> diff size: 34 lines
Please note that those differences are just of the self-link kind, as
translated by lynx: nei
Hello,
i found some (well, 27) packages where the Homepage: entry in the
control file is different than the Homepage: entry in the
upstream-metadata file. (Althouh 27 is now much right now, i actually
expect this number to increase, as there surely will be more
upstream-metadata per package in the
11 matches
Mail list logo
