Okay; will take your advice on that.
(Have already push an appropriate comment in debian/copyright into the
VCS.)
--Barak.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@
Hi!
* Barak A. Pearlmutter [100123 19:44]:
> To my mind, this is (a) a "wishlist" bug, certainly not RC, and (b) is
> not in truth a DFSG issue.
>
> SUMMARY. Some documentation is available only in a difficult-to-edit
> format, the latex sources used to produce that document having been
> lost.
To my mind, this is (a) a "wishlist" bug, certainly not RC, and (b) is
not in truth a DFSG issue.
SUMMARY. Some documentation is available only in a difficult-to-edit
format, the latex sources used to produce that document having been
lost. The "wish" is that this were not the case.
If a packag
Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
> Um, or we could just not worry about it?
DFSG issues are not to be ignored. Please do take this bug seriously.
Cheers
Luk (with its Release Manager's hat)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trou
Um, or we could just not worry about it?
--Barak.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 04:25:03PM +, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
> The document in question is in a human-readable format. It may be a
> pain to edit, but it is not impossible, and it is certainly not
> illegal! I do not see any practical benefit of removing helpful
> documentation just beca
I'm sorry, but although I understand your point, I find myself in
disagreement with the resolution you suggest.
The document in question is in a human-readable format. It may be a
pain to edit, but it is not impossible, and it is certainly not
illegal! I do not see any practical benefit of remov
tags 546492 + patch
thanks
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 04:54:25PM +, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
> I'd point out that, if I wanted to edit that document, I would
> mechanically extract the text, rather than using a hex editor. As is,
> the document is in a "transparent" format in the sense used b
By "not in control of the standard" I believe Leon meant that
Lizardtech, rather than he, has the authority to change the DjVu
standard---rather than anything technical about document production
and modification.
I'd point out that, if I wanted to edit that document, I would
mechanically extract t
* Barak A. Pearlmutter , 2009-12-01, 02:14:
I have consulted with upstream, and apparently the original LaTeX used
to produce this document has been lost. Ideally, someone will
manually recreate some LaTeX sources. But given the circumstances, I
do not believe that this is a show stopper: as of
I have consulted with upstream, and apparently the original LaTeX used
to produce this document has been lost. Ideally, someone will
manually recreate some LaTeX sources. But given the circumstances, I
do not believe that this is a show stopper: as of today, the DjVu file
is the preferred existin
11 matches
Mail list logo
