On Sat, Jan 07, 2017 at 07:32:12PM +, Riku Voipio wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 02:32:45PM +0100, Christian Seiler wrote:
> > On 01/05/2017 02:06 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > > Quoting Riku Voipio (2017-01-05 12:53:16)
> > >> Vast majority of users would only install this via dependencies
On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 02:32:45PM +0100, Christian Seiler wrote:
> On 01/05/2017 02:06 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > Quoting Riku Voipio (2017-01-05 12:53:16)
> >> Vast majority of users would only install this via dependencies. It's
> >> hardly a node-specific problem that debian package searc
Hi Praveen,
On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 10:16:37AM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> Hi Praveen,
>
> I assume that all these ITPs are prompted by your crowd-funding effort.
>
> Today we have #850399 which plumbs new depths in that it has had both
> long and short descriptions trimmed from the body of the
Hi Praveen,
I assume that all these ITPs are prompted by your crowd-funding effort.
Today we have #850399 which plumbs new depths in that it has had both
long and short descriptions trimmed from the body of the message.
Please would you take responsibility for your packaging team by
instructing
On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 10:01:38AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 9:32 PM, Christian Seiler wrote:
>
> > Could we maybe hide library packages from apt searches by default?
>
> This is going to have unintended consequences; for example, if we base
> it on Debian Section fields, lib
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 9:32 PM, Christian Seiler wrote:
> Could we maybe hide library packages from apt searches by default?
This is going to have unintended consequences; for example, if we base
it on Debian Section fields, library source packages that build a
binary package containing tools, th
Christian Seiler writes:
> On 01/05/2017 02:06 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>> Quoting Riku Voipio (2017-01-05 12:53:16)
>>> Vast majority of users would only install this via dependencies. It's
>>> hardly a node-specific problem that debian package searches output
>>> large amount of packages t
Quoting Christian Seiler (2017-01-05 14:32:45)
> On 01/05/2017 02:06 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>> Quoting Riku Voipio (2017-01-05 12:53:16)
>>> Vast majority of users would only install this via dependencies.
>>> It's hardly a node-specific problem that debian package searches
>>> output large
On 01/05/2017 02:06 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Riku Voipio (2017-01-05 12:53:16)
>> Vast majority of users would only install this via dependencies. It's
>> hardly a node-specific problem that debian package searches output
>> large amount of packages that are not useful unless you hap
Quoting Riku Voipio (2017-01-05 12:53:16)
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 10:53:36AM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
>> At present you are forcing that vast majority of our users, that have
>> no interest in this software, to individually learn that they need to
>> look out for the node- prefix, and ignore
On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 10:53:36AM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> At present you are forcing that vast majority of our users, that have no
> interest in this software, to individually learn that they need to look
> out for the node- prefix, and ignore such packages.
Vast majority of users would only
Hi Roshan,
Please don't take this personally, you just happen to be the one
touching the most recent remarkably meaninglessly described ITP for a
node-* package -- I could easily have picked on one of the many other
examples.
I've Bcc:ed the bug to ensure that replies about this stay on -devel.
12 matches
Mail list logo
