Christoph Egger writes:
> Rupert Swarbrick writes:
>> (1) Does it seem sensible to package the manual as ecl-doc?
>
> I do think so, yes
>
>> (2) If so, since the manual is in a different upstream archive, should
>> the source package be split? (At the moment, the "ecl" source
>> pa
Hi!
Rupert Swarbrick writes:
> (1) Does it seem sensible to package the manual as ecl-doc?
I do think so, yes
> (2) If so, since the manual is in a different upstream archive, should
> the source package be split? (At the moment, the "ecl" source
> package builds both the ecl and
I sent a note to the packaging team [1] to see if we can get some
progress on this issue.
Rupert
[1]
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-common-lisp-devel/2012-August/003227.html
___
pkg-common-lisp-devel mailing list
pkg-common-lisp-devel@l
