On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 07:24:32 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> in the past, debian/copyright files were sometimes (ab)used for
> arbitrary information. For example, I used to include references about
> who paid for/sponsored the packaging.
>
> This is no longer possible with the machine readable format
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 29-09-2010 03:29, Ben Finney wrote:
> Marc Haber writes:
[...]
>> This is no longer possible with the machine readable format of
>> debian/copyright. Where am I supposed to put this information
>> nowadays?
>
> I see two reasonable options: don't
Marc Haber writes:
> in the past, debian/copyright files were sometimes (ab)used for
> arbitrary information. For example, I used to include references about
> who paid for/sponsored the packaging.
I agree with your implication that arbitrary information of that kind
doesn't belong in ‘debian/co
On 2010-09-29 07:26 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 15:19:01 -0700, Steve Langasek
> wrote:
>>That is the customary workaround for this issue. The downside is that it
>>causes the build to be run under $rootcmd instead of running as a normal
>>user. Since all buildds are using fa
On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 15:19:01 -0700, Steve Langasek
wrote:
>That is the customary workaround for this issue. The downside is that it
>causes the build to be run under $rootcmd instead of running as a normal
>user. Since all buildds are using fakeroot these days instead of sudo
Does pbuilder supp
Hi,
in the past, debian/copyright files were sometimes (ab)used for
arbitrary information. For example, I used to include references about
who paid for/sponsored the packaging.
This is no longer possible with the machine readable format of
debian/copyright. Where am I supposed to put this informa
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Al Nikolov
* Package name: drupal6-mod-trackback
Version : 1.2
Upstream Author : thePanz (http://drupal.org/user/58689)
* URL : http://drupal.org/project/trackback
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: PHP
Description
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: gustavo panizzo
* Package name: vavoom
Version : 1.32-1
Upstream Author : Janis Legzdinsh
* URL : http://www.vavoom-engine.com
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C++
Description : The most advanced Doom/Heretic/
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Roman Haefeli
* Package name: pd-readanysf
Version : 0.41
Upstream Author : August Black
* URL : http://aug.ment.org/readanysf/
* License : GPL-2
Programming Lang: C++
Description : A Pd external for reading mul
On 2010-09-28, Simon Richter wrote:
> The least contentious solution right now would be filing bugs, IMO. All
> that'd need is an autobuilder and a few volunteers to process the
> logs.
If there's a clean plan and working software we can run this on Debian
infrastructure. We're working on provid
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: IOhannes m zmoelnig
* Package name: gstreamer0.10-v4l2loopback
Version : 0.2.0
Upstream Author : IOhannes m zmoelnig
* URL : http://github.com/umlaeute/gst-v4l2loopback
* License : LGPL
Programming Lang: C
Descriptio
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 01:29:46PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 28/09/10 at 09:16 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 12:37:55AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > > OK, thanks for the clarification. Still, we need to decide—sort of
> > > > now—whether we need to add s
On 28/09/10 at 09:16 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 12:37:55AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > OK, thanks for the clarification. Still, we need to decide—sort of
> > > now—whether we need to add support in reportbug for mailing backport
> > > report bugs to the bpo li
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 11:01:16AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > The not-so-evident part is that I want the syntax of this field to be
> > sufficiently extensible so that we can encode more information like
> > support of hardening build flags and similar stuff that we might want to
> > know
Fernando Lemos, 2010-09-27 17:26:16 -0300 :
[...]
>> I'm fine with an incentive. An official promise by the project that
>> unstable and testing (or rolling) *will* be usable, on the other hand,
>> makes me really nervous.
>
> I recommend that you watch the BoF video, if you haven't already. Jo
On Mon Sep 27 15:18, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Unless I missed it in a previous discussion, I can't see what's wrong
> > with simply mandating support with a new Standards-Version as Bernhard
> > suggested. Could you elaborate on why Build-Features seems preferable
> > since this appears to be a sim
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 09:40:36AM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi Harald,
Hi Holger
>
> On Dienstag, 28. September 2010, Harald Jenny wrote:
> > > you don't need to wait for any specific authorization to
> > > prepare an NMU.
> > Well I personally find it impolite to prepare an NMU without pri
Hi Harald,
On Dienstag, 28. September 2010, Harald Jenny wrote:
> > you don't need to wait for any specific authorization to
> > prepare an NMU.
> Well I personally find it impolite to prepare an NMU without prior getting
> in touch with the maintainer...
see below:
> > You can do that right ahe
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 12:37:55AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > OK, thanks for the clarification. Still, we need to decide—sort of
> > now—whether we need to add support in reportbug for mailing backport
> > report bugs to the bpo list or not (and that might require some time, as
> > someone ne
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 10:30:59PM +, Richard A Nelson wrote:
> On 09/27/2010 10:14 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 06:33:05PM +0200, Harald Jenny wrote:
> >> I'm sorry for disturbing all of you but I'm currently facing the problem
> >> that
> >> the maintainer of
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 12:14:45AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> [ adding MIA to Cc, for further inquiries, and the maintainer himself ]
>
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 06:33:05PM +0200, Harald Jenny wrote:
> > I'm sorry for disturbing all of you but I'm currently facing the problem
> > that
> >
21 matches
Mail list logo
