On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> In fact, I even demoted it from Recommends to Suggests on a package
> because many people still run with install-recommends=true and it
> was not strictly needed.
Thanks for fixing a bug in your package.
Just don't blame other people for yo
Neil McGovern debian.org> writes:
> > > > I absolutely do not want to see anything related to ruby on my
> > > > systems.
> > SC#4 and not forcing bad things on users.
> Fantastic. In that case I propose we remove mksh from the archive as
>From my system ≠ from the archive. I don’t say everyon
On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 02:18:40PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Philipp Kern debian.org> writes:
>
> > > I absolutely do not want to see anything related to ruby on my
> > > systems.
> >
> > How is that relevant for Debian?
>
> SC#4 and not forcing bad things on users.
>
Fantastic. In that
Philipp Kern debian.org> writes:
> > I absolutely do not want to see anything related to ruby on my
> > systems.
>
> How is that relevant for Debian?
SC#4 and not forcing bad things on users.
bye,
//mirabilos (at work)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a
Peter Samuelson dixit:
>> I absolutely do not want to see anything related to ruby on my
>> systems.
>
>Why? Is this just an emotional reaction, or is it the 13 MB of
>dependencies, or something else?
Something else, mostly technical, the rest personal.
>I wonder if anyone feels the same way ab
On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 01:16:12PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Benjamin Drung debian.org> writes:
> > devscript had only Perl and Shell scripts initially, but then gained
> > Python scripts. I don't see any reason to not accept ruby script. ruby
> > would pull in another ~ 13 MB of storage, bu
On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 01:02:35PM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> [Thorsten Glaser]
> > I absolutely do not want to see anything related to ruby on my
> > systems.
> Why? Is this just an emotional reaction, or is it the 13 MB of
> dependencies, or something else?
> I wonder if anyone feels the
[Thorsten Glaser]
> I absolutely do not want to see anything related to ruby on my
> systems.
Why? Is this just an emotional reaction, or is it the 13 MB of
dependencies, or something else?
I wonder if anyone feels the same way about, say, libraries written in
FORTRAN, or binaries linked agains
Benjamin Drung debian.org> writes:
> devscript had only Perl and Shell scripts initially, but then gained
> Python scripts. I don't see any reason to not accept ruby script. ruby
> would pull in another ~ 13 MB of storage, but devscripts targets
> developer machines.
I absolutely do not want to
Am Dienstag, den 03.09.2013, 22:18 -0700 schrieb Russ Allbery:
> tony mancill writes:
>
> > Thank you for pointing this out. I just recently uploaded a script,
> > splitpatch, that I argued should be accepted as-is (i.e. as a "micro
> > package") because of the dependency on ruby.
>
> > Given t
tony mancill writes:
> Thank you for pointing this out. I just recently uploaded a script,
> splitpatch, that I argued should be accepted as-is (i.e. as a "micro
> package") because of the dependency on ruby.
> Given that ruby is becoming more popular for scripting, what do folks
> think about
On 09/03/2013 02:17 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Vincent Danjean writes:
>
>> The fact is that the FTP team comment was correct: it is really a small
>> package. So, my question was really open (I do not know every package in
>> Debian), in case someone has a useful suggestion (that does not involve
Vincent Danjean writes:
> The fact is that the FTP team comment was correct: it is really a small
> package. So, my question was really open (I do not know every package in
> Debian), in case someone has a useful suggestion (that does not involve
> to rewrite the script).
moreutils is another po
Le 03/09/2013 14:50, Paul Tagliamonte a écrit :
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 02:31:35PM +0200, Vincent Danjean wrote:
>> So, I'm looking for a package that would accept this ruby script
>> (I will probably ask linux-util anyway if nobody has other suggestions)
>> and I will keep it in my perso repos
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 02:31:35PM +0200, Vincent Danjean wrote:
> Le 03/09/2013 11:52, Paul Wise a écrit :
> > On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Vincent Danjean wrote:
> >
> >> Never mind. My current problem is that I have no idea which current
> >> package to contact to ask for a inclusion. It
Le 03/09/2013 11:52, Paul Wise a écrit :
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Vincent Danjean wrote:
>
>> Never mind. My current problem is that I have no idea which current
>> package to contact to ask for a inclusion. It is not important enough
>> to be included in packages such as util-linux an
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Vincent Danjean wrote:
> Never mind. My current problem is that I have no idea which current
> package to contact to ask for a inclusion. It is not important enough
> to be included in packages such as util-linux and few (no?) system/devel
> packages already have
17 matches
Mail list logo
