On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 07:58:15PM +0100, Ana Guerrero wrote:
> Yes, but as long as we are also using the archive sections, we should improve
> them.
ACK.
> We will always have software fitting in several section, and we never will
> solve
> that problem as long as we use them.
ACK.
> What yo
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 01:40:07PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> I agree with Andreas here: we already have other ways to classify software, in
> particular with the Debtags, and to group packages, in particular with the
> Blends tasks, so fragmenting the sections will only introduce doubts and
>
Le Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 08:36:24AM +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
>
> While I agree in principle with this attempt there might be a lot of
> packages which fit into Science *and* Education section. The sections
> approach in Debian is weak in the way that a package can only be put in
> one sectio
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 08:36:24AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> While I agree in principle with this attempt there might be a lot of
> packages which fit into Science *and* Education section. The sections
> approach in Debian is weak in the way that a package can only be put in
> one section. Th
[Bringing this bug to the eyes of debian-devel readers]
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 08:34:48PM +0100, Ana Guerrero wrote:
> Package: ftp.debian.org
>
>
> Hi,
>
> While trying to sort of the Section field for the apps included in kdeedu,
> I started to wonder if we are missing a subsection in the ar
5 matches
Mail list logo
