On Sun, 2019-12-08 at 23:24 +0100, Simon Richter wrote:
[...]
> The rest of the changelog only exists to preserve history. When you make
> an upload to experimental closing a bug, and you later upload the
> package to unstable, you have to close the bugs again in the changelog
> entry for unstable.
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek writes:
> Using systemd-sysusers and systemd-tmpfiles more widely was mentioned a
> few times, along with a statement that an implementation for non-systemd
> systems would need to be provided. Both those programs work just fine
> without systemd not running as PID1. (
Hi,
[disclaimer: on work on systemd upstream, I'm not an active Debian
user anymore.]
Using systemd-sysusers and systemd-tmpfiles more widely was mentioned
a few times, along with a statement that an implementation for
non-systemd systems would need to be provided. Both those programs
work just f
Hi,
On 08.12.19 22:29, Guillem Jover wrote:
> I think there are two important properties that need to be preserved
> so that debian/changelog entries keep making sense both for humans
> and machines alike. The first is that the parseable format entries
> should be sorted by version, otherwise thi
On 12/3/19 8:21 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Paolo Greppi writes:
>
>> What is the best approach for d/changelog when releasing a package to
>> unstable after it has been through a few iterations to experimental ?
>
>> It would seem that the right thing to do is to keep all experimental
>> chang
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Stig Sandbeck Mathisen
* Package name: ruby-optimist
Version : 3.0.0
Upstream Author : William Morgan, Keenan Brock, Jason Frey
* URL : https://www.manageiq.org/optimist/
* License : MIT/Expat
Programming Lang: Ruby
D
Hi!
On Tue, 2019-12-03 at 08:15:19 +0100, Paolo Greppi wrote:
> What is the best approach for d/changelog when releasing a package
> to unstable after it has been through a few iterations to experimental ?
>
> It would seem that the right thing to do is to keep all experimental
> changelog entries
On 08/12/2019 13:27, JungHwan Kang wrote:
Hi, forks.
I appreciate your previous answer to my question about the open-source
licenses.
May I ask another question?
1. Is it no matter who releases his Linux distribution under his license
for commercially?
the distribution is made of modifie
Hi, forks.
I appreciate your previous answer to my question about the open-source
licenses.
May I ask another question?
1. Is it no matter who releases his Linux distribution under his license
for commercially?
the distribution is made of modified and unmodified packages from
upstream.
2. Fol
On Sun, Dec 08, 2019 at 04:37:28PM +0900, JungHwan Kang wrote:
> Thank you for your detailed answer. :)
> I'm gonna ask one more question, please.
I don't see a question below.
> I was confused Ubuntu cannot have an overall license, because of the
> license of Ubuntu as below.
> "Ubuntu operates u
10 matches
Mail list logo
