On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 01:28:09AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20 2009, Mike O'Connor wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Why is this list needed?
> >
> > Often the license requires it. For instance the BSD license says,
> > "Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright".
>
On 2009-03-20, Ben Finney wrote:
> All of what you've demonstrated is part of what Mike covered with
> ???one has to go through all of the source files anyway???, is it not?
> The point I got from his message is that, having *already* accepted
> the burden of going through all the files, one can t
pe, 2009-03-20 kello 04:00 +0100, Romain Beauxis kirjoitti:
> Was there any intent of writting such a tool at some point ?
> Most of the specifications also deduce from an actual implementation, which
> also helps people who don't want to follow the multiple revisions to check
> and convert their
On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 11:07:29PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Mar 15, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> > Being able to rename an interface without messing with udev is a
> > feature, not a bug.
> Every relevant Linux distribution requires udev, and so do many
> important features of Debian systems. Any
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 09:09:53AM +, Roger Leigh
wrote:
> Mike Hommey wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 11:02:48PM -0700, Daniel Moerner wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Mike O'Connor wrote:
To me, it seems like since one has to go through all of the source files
anywa
Sune Vuorela writes:
> On 2009-03-20, Ben Finney wrote:
> > All of what you've demonstrated is part of what Mike covered with
> > ???one has to go through all of the source files anyway???, is it
> > not? The point I got from his message is that, having *already*
> > accepted the burden of going
On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 09:05:53AM +0100, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> Ben Hutchings writes:
> > You can do this with ethtool now, and more cleanly:
> >
> > link-speed 100
> > link-duplex full
>
> Yes, I know. But that means that existing working configurations have
> to be modified.
Which shoul
[Transferred to -devel as suggested. Please follow-up there].
Le Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 04:40:33PM +, Sune Vuorela a écrit :
> http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat
>
> It is a too complex, overengineered solution to a very minor issue.
> It is not easy readables for humans
> It is u
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 09:57:13AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 11:07:29PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > Every relevant Linux distribution requires udev, and so do many
> > important features of Debian systems. Anything not compatible with udev
> > is a toy which wastes
Le vendredi 20 mars 2009 à 08:28 +, Sune Vuorela a écrit :
> If anyone wants to actually try working with copyright files for one of
> those "bigger" packages, Mike O'Connor helpfulyl just opened #520485 to
> track one of them. Patches are welcome.
How thoughtful of his.
Hint: you can open su
Mike Hommey wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 11:02:48PM -0700, Daniel Moerner wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Mike O'Connor wrote:
To me, it seems like since one has to go through all of the source files
anyway, creating a list of copyright holders while you are doing it is a
trivial ta
On Mar 20, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> It is still possible to install and run Lenny without the use of udev,
> and many people do so.
popcon shows that the number is trivial. Definitely not "many".
> Whether you agree that this is useful or a 'toy'
> setup is beside the point; fact is that it happ
Twas brillig at 10:50:23 20.03.2009 UTC+01 when kilob...@angband.pl did gyre
and gimble:
AB> It's bloat and trouble for embedded or limited ones.
mdev from busybox kicks in there.
--
pgpoBcZgEVOcl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hi all,
I had some talks with Eduard Bloch (the author of svn-buildpackage) and
Eddy Petrisor (as a contributor listed in its uploaders field) and it
seems that both of them lost their interest in svn-bp and/or are too
busy to take care of current development. Some time ago I started fixing
some o
Le Friday 20 March 2009 10:58:53 Josselin Mouette, vous avez écrit :
> Le vendredi 20 mars 2009 à 08:28 +, Sune Vuorela a écrit :
> > If anyone wants to actually try working with copyright files for one of
> > those "bigger" packages, Mike O'Connor helpfulyl just opened #520485 to
> > track one
On Fri March 20 2009 02:53:19 Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Mar 20, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > It is still possible to install and run Lenny without the use of udev,
> > and many people do so.
>
> popcon shows that the number is trivial. Definitely not "many".
Perhaps sysadmins that go to the effort o
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 07:46:11AM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > In shorter words: I think something should be done about the copyright
> > file to encourage developers to actually perform an audit of the
> > license status of files in their packages before they upload. The
> > current copyright te
On Mar 20, Adam Borowski wrote:
> udev is desired, nearly required for big systems, right. It's bloat and
It's not.
> trouble for embedded or limited ones. I don't do embedded personally so I
> have no idea how udev fares there, but I can tell you that vservers and udev
> don't go well togethe
Hi,
On Freitag, 20. März 2009, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> The kernel team seems to have a full waiver for listing copyright
> holders.
AFAIK linux-kbuild-2.6.28 was rejected from NEW for this very reason.
regards,
Holger
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 08:28:34AM +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2009-03-20, Ben Finney wrote:
> > All of what you've demonstrated is part of what Mike covered with
> > ???one has to go through all of the source files anyway???, is it not?
> > The point I got from his message is that, having *al
Le vendredi 20 mars 2009 à 12:14 +0100, Marco d'Itri a écrit :
> This is why you install udev in the host system and bind-mount its /dev
> to the /dev of each context.
Erm… no, you don’t.
--
.''`. Debian 5.0 "Lenny" has been released!
: :' :
`. `' Last night, Darth Vader came down from p
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 10:56:39PM -0400, Joe Nahmias wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Joe Nahmias
>
> * Package name: configure-trackpoint
> Version : 0.7
> Upstream Author : Cheuksan Edward Wang
> * URL : http://tpctl.sourceforge.net/configure-tr
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 09:41:36PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Ben Finney writes:
>
> > The point is that, since we can predict the need for this information,
> > we have the choice of assuming the information is there when we
> > distribute and never looking for it until the need arises in the f
Le vendredi 20 mars 2009 à 11:16 +, Noah Slater a écrit :
> As a maintainer, it is your duty to make sure that everything you upload is
> DFSG
> free, which means checking every single file. As you have to do this anyway,
> it
> makes sense to record that information in debian/copyright. If y
Le Friday 20 March 2009 12:55:05 Josselin Mouette, vous avez écrit :
> > If that's too much effort for your, get a co-maintainer or a different
> > package.
>
> Fine. Do you have co-maintainers on sale?
It is not about co-maintaining, but about co-reviewing which is a totally
different task.
Ro
Le vendredi 20 mars 2009 à 13:02 +0100, Romain Beauxis a écrit :
> Le Friday 20 March 2009 12:55:05 Josselin Mouette, vous avez écrit :
> > Fine. Do you have co-maintainers on sale?
>
> It is not about co-maintaining, but about co-reviewing which is a totally
> different task.
Do you really thin
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 12:34:44AM +0100, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 12:21 AM, Luca Capello wrote:
> > I would prefer any new information to be added there instead, since the
> > files above are available offline as well.
>
> Does not forbid to add to wiki in order to ease
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On Mar 20, Mike Bird wrote:
>
> > > popcon shows that the number is trivial. Definitely not "many".
> > Perhaps sysadmins that go to the effort of removing udev from
> > some systems are less likely to install popcon on those systems?
> And surely lurkers a
Le Friday 20 March 2009 13:07:44 Josselin Mouette, vous avez écrit :
> > It is not about co-maintaining, but about co-reviewing which is a totally
> > different task.
>
> Do you really think we can find an unlimited amount of volunteers
> willing to continuously read thousands of files to find the
Goswin von Brederlow (17/03/2009):
> Aurelien Jarno writes:
> > I am interested in seeing the dpkg patch.
>
> The most current work should be on the multiarch alioth project. If
> you do work on something please add it there.
>
> http://alioth.debian.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=310911
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 12:14:53PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Mar 20, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > trouble for embedded or limited ones. I don't do embedded personally so I
> > have no idea how udev fares there, but I can tell you that vservers and udev
> > don't go well together. Udev expects
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 01:07:44PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le vendredi 20 mars 2009 à 13:02 +0100, Romain Beauxis a écrit :
> > Le Friday 20 March 2009 12:55:05 Josselin Mouette, vous avez écrit :
> > > Fine. Do you have co-maintainers on sale?
> >
> > It is not about co-maintaining, but a
On Mar 20, Adam Borowski wrote:
> They have their specific needs, and the last time I checked, udev couldn't
> fulfill them. You need just /dev/{null,zero,full,random,urandom,tty,ptmx}
> and the links to /proc/. More may be needed, but that depends on the
You keep missing the point. udev matter
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 12:20:14PM +, Noah Slater
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 01:07:44PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le vendredi 20 mars 2009 à 13:02 +0100, Romain Beauxis a écrit :
> > > Le Friday 20 March 2009 12:55:05 Josselin Mouette, vous avez écrit :
> > > > Fine. Do you hav
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 01:24:01PM +0100, Romain Beauxis
wrote:
> Le Friday 20 March 2009 13:07:44 Josselin Mouette, vous avez écrit :
> > > It is not about co-maintaining, but about co-reviewing which is a totally
> > > different task.
> >
> > Do you really think we can find an unlimited amount
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 01:03:32PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Mar 20, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > They have their specific needs, and the last time I checked, udev couldn't
> > fulfill them. You need just /dev/{null,zero,full,random,urandom,tty,ptmx}
> > and the links to /proc/. More may be ne
Le Friday 20 March 2009 14:18:22 Mike Hommey, vous avez écrit :
> > This idea of a public reviewing page for NEWly uploaded packages really
> > looked appealing to me.
>
> On the other hand, when you look at projets such as Mozilla or Webkit,
> there are people already doing that upstream, or ensur
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Jon Dowland
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 12:34:44AM +0100, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 12:21 AM, Luca Capello wrote:
>> > I would prefer any new information to be added there instead, since the
>> > files above are available offline as
On Mar 20, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > You keep missing the point. udev matters in the host system, not in each
> > context.
> Do you mean the original point of this thread, about ifrename (which indeed
> can't be used inside vserver or openvz, can be in xen)? Or do you mean
> other uses of udev?
A
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 11:11:20AM +, Noah Slater
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 07:46:11AM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > In shorter words: I think something should be done about the copyright
> > > file to encourage developers to actually perform an audit of the
> > > license status of f
Hi,
I tried to find a clear advise how to reasonable format lists inside long
descriptions of packages. The only thing I know is that lines with two
leading spaces is considered verbose. This leaves a lot of freedom to
simulate for instance itemize lists. I'd like to give some examples for
pac
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 02:41:31PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > It behoves us as distributors to check, no matter how hard it is.
> >
> > If you think that sounds like too much work, maintain a different package.
>
> If you don't stop writing crap like this, I really think I *will* stop
> maintain
Hi,
Since a while I'm pretty active in using Debian/Linux for Multimedia
production, especially focusing on music production (check
www.linuxmusicians.com for instance).
Debian is a great system to use for this. Unfortunately there are
nice music production applications which are not in
also sprach Andreas Tille [2009.03.20.1445 +0100]:
> I tried to find a clear advise how to reasonable format lists inside long
> descriptions of packages. The only thing I know is that lines with two
> leading spaces is considered verbose. This leaves a lot of freedom to
> simulate for instance
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 02:02:31PM +, Noah Slater
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 02:41:31PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > It behoves us as distributors to check, no matter how hard it is.
> > >
> > > If you think that sounds like too much work, maintain a different package.
> >
> > If you
Le vendredi 20 mars 2009 à 14:02 +, Noah Slater a écrit :
> If we were suggesting some totally arbitrary and time consuming task, then I
> could understand your concerns. However, you should be checking each file as a
> part of your packaging, all that is being requested is that you document th
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Grammostola Rosea wrote:
For instance, I posted some apps which are not in Debian right now as wishes
(RFP):
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?submitter=rosea.grammost...@gmail.com
(There is work on progress on Frescobaldi, Rumor (my first Debian package ;)
)
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, martin f krafft wrote:
What we really should do, instead of clinging to the NIH-behaviour,
reinventing the wheel, and polishing it over and over again is ditch
the pseudo-RFC822 format we have and use Yaml instead.
http://www.yaml.org/start.html
http://yaml.org/spec/1.2/
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 02:37:44PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Mar 20, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > > You keep missing the point. udev matters in the host system, not in each
> > > context.
> > Do you mean the original point of this thread, about ifrename (which indeed
> > can't be used inside vse
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Noah Slater wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 02:41:31PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > It behoves us as distributors to check, no matter how hard it is.
> > >
> > > If you think that sounds like too much work, maintain a different package.
> >
> > If you don't stop writing cra
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 03:13:29PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> No, look at the text I quoted : you suggested to maintain a different package.
Yes, out of several emails I sent to the list, you selected a single sentence.
I apologise if you got the wrong message from what I had written, it was not
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 03:14:36PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le vendredi 20 mars 2009 à 14:02 +, Noah Slater a écrit :
> > If we were suggesting some totally arbitrary and time consuming task, then I
> > could understand your concerns. However, you should be checking each file
> > as a
Mike Hommey writes:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 12:20:14PM +, Noah Slater
> wrote:
> > However, it is required that we check every single file we upload
> > to the Debian archives, so this task has to be done in some form
> > or another. If you feel like your current packages are too much
> >
Twas brillig at 15:30:11 20.03.2009 UTC+01 when kilob...@angband.pl did gyre
and gimble:
AB> udev is needed to allow for complex and/or hotplugged hardware.
AB> Small systems have either little, static hardware,
Small systems nowadays have a lot of hotplugged hardware: various USB
devices, fr
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 03:35:22PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Noah Slater wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 02:41:31PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > > It behoves us as distributors to check, no matter how hard it is.
> > > >
> > > > If you think that sounds like too muc
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 02:35:34PM +, Noah Slater
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 03:13:29PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > No, look at the text I quoted : you suggested to maintain a different
> > package.
>
> Yes, out of several emails I sent to the list, you selected a single sentence.
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 01:46:51AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> > I don't see what your problem is.
>
> It seems that the problem is that “look for collaborators” is what
> they're already doing, without apparent impact on the problem at hand
> (the workload involved in copyright auuditing of the pac
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 02:40:18PM +, Noah Slater
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 03:14:36PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le vendredi 20 mars 2009 à 14:02 +, Noah Slater a écrit :
> > > If we were suggesting some totally arbitrary and time consuming task,
> > > then I
> > > could
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 02:59:35PM +, Noah Slater
wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 01:46:51AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> > > I don't see what your problem is.
> >
> > It seems that the problem is that “look for collaborators” is what
> > they're already doing, without apparent impact on the p
As an additional hint the multimedia team might consider using the Debian Pure
Blends framework which enables them to show quite simply what is just there and
what they are working on (for instance see just issued bits [1]). So if you
are interested in those tasks and bugs pages or in multimedia
Hi again,
Obey Arthur Liu suggested to have this svn-bp re-engineering as a Google
Summer of Code project. I'm not sure if it's big enough to "employ" a
student for such a long time.
I'd like to see comments on this, too.
Hauke
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Fri, Mar 20 2009, Noah Slater wrote:
> No one is saying it isn't a chore.
>
> As a maintainer, it is your duty to make sure that everything you
> upload is DFSG free, which means checking every single file. As you
> have to do this anyway, it makes sense to record that information in
> debian/c
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 03:55:30PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> That you actually felt stroing enough to type twice, which pissed me off.
> See <20090320111658.gd7...@tumbolia.org> if you don't remember suggesting
> to maintain a different package.
Well, there are only three solutions, and I have s
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 04:01:56PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > * Complaining that you would have to check every single file implies that
> > you
> > don't already check every single file, which you should be doing.
>
> If all the above were true, no package of xulrunner, iceweasel, openoff
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 04:12:37PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> Point me to the paragraph in the policy that says that the copyright file
> must list all copyright holders and licensing info for all individual files
> in the source package.
>
> Let me help you: there is no such paragraph.
So what o
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 04:29:35PM +0100, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
>> As an additional hint the multimedia team might consider using the Debian
>> Pure
>> Blends framework which enables them to show quite simply what is just there
>> and
>> what they are working on (for instance see just issu
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 11:13:45PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> > On Mar 20, Mike Bird wrote:
> > > > popcon shows that the number is trivial. Definitely not "many".
> > > Perhaps sysadmins that go to the effort of removing udev from
> > > some systems are le
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:40:24 +0100 (CET)
Andreas Tille wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hello,
>
> as you might have noticed the effort formerly known as Custom
> Debian Distributions was renamed to Debian Pure Blends (see
> [1] for the reasons). This process is now
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 02:45:09PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> 1. Itemize lists: ()
>
>
> 2. Enumerate lists: ()
> --
>
> 3. Description lists: ()
>
>
> This suggestion is far from complete and should be enhanced.
Well
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 12:20:39PM -0400, Daniel Dickinson wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:40:24 +0100 (CET)
> Andreas Tille wrote:
>
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > as you might have noticed the effort formerly known as Custom
> > Debian Distributio
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 04:54:30PM +0100, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote:
> Obey Arthur Liu suggested to have this svn-bp re-engineering as a Google
> Summer of Code project. I'm not sure if it's big enough to "employ" a
> student for such a long time.
I think it's a worthy goal in the spirit of GSoC. Whet
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 03:18:33PM +, Noah Slater wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 04:12:37PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > Point me to the paragraph in the policy that says that the copyright file
> > must list all copyright holders and licensing info for all individual files
> > in the source
Quoting Daniel Dickinson (csh...@brucetelecom.com):
> On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:40:24 +0100 (CET)
> Andreas Tille wrote:
>
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > as you might have noticed the effort formerly known as Custom
> > Debian Distributions was renamed
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 05:45:11PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> I guess people think the new copyright proposal mandates mentioning the
> copyright holders etc. in a much more verbose way than Policy does so
> far.
>
> So people consider it a regression with respect to their routine.
Great, so it
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 02:35:34PM +, Noah Slater wrote:
> The distinction I was trying to draw is that this matter is totally
> unrelated to the copyright documentation we keep in the packages.
> Considering that it is already our mandate to check every single file,
No, it isn't.
On Fri, Mar
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 09:56:39AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> No, it doesn't.
>
> If I have a good upstream and am confident that the work has been correctly
> licensed, there's no reason for me to go through the software file-by-file
> just to double-check this.
As I have been corrected, so a
Le vendredi 20 mars 2009 à 10:39 -0500, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
> I don't care for copyright notices, really. I care for license
> statements; and I take the upstream on trust that the license attached
> to the work is valid (since it is hard to determine every copyright
> holder -- p
On Fri March 20 2009 09:29:26 Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 11:13:45PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> > Marco, it was you that cited absence of evidence (the low popcon
> > score) as evidence of absence. You don't get to accuse Adam of doing
> > the same, especially since he's not doi
Josselin Mouette writes:
> Le vendredi 20 mars 2009 à 10:39 -0500, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
>> I don't care for copyright notices, really. I care for license
>> statements; and I take the upstream on trust that the license attached
>> to the work is valid (since it is hard to determin
Russ Allbery writes:
> started experimenting with the new copyright file format, I never
> documented the license or copyright information for any of the
> Autotools-generated files, and I never heard a peep of concern about
> that.)
Currently the ftpmasters don't require those copyrights to be l
Romain Beauxis writes:
> Le Friday 20 March 2009 19:12:02 Russ Allbery, vous avez écrit :
>> Maybe the best resolution to this is to have a broader discussion that
>> leads to a rewording of Policy 12.5 that makes the requirements
>> explicit, with ftp-master buy-in on what the requirements are?
Kalle Kivimaa writes:
> Russ Allbery writes:
>> started experimenting with the new copyright file format, I never
>> documented the license or copyright information for any of the
>> Autotools-generated files, and I never heard a peep of concern about
>> that.)
> Currently the ftpmasters don't
Le Friday 20 March 2009 19:38:34 Russ Allbery, vous avez écrit :
> > But do you think this is possible ?
>
> Sure. Resolving this sort of thing is the point of the Policy process,
> after all, and we have a clear authority that does the enforcement
> (ftp-master), so it seems likely that we can re
Le Friday 20 March 2009 19:12:02 Russ Allbery, vous avez écrit :
> Maybe the best resolution to this is to have a broader discussion that
> leads to a rewording of Policy 12.5 that makes the requirements explicit,
> with ftp-master buy-in on what the requirements are?
> on the same page and every
At the encouragement of Luk Claes, I would like to raise this subject in
the general mailing list.
It has been my impression that when using aptitude and requesting to
install/upgrade desktops (KDE, maybe also Gnome), several other
packages, which don't interest me, are installed as well. They ca
Romain Beauxis wrote:
> Le Friday 20 March 2009 19:38:34 Russ Allbery, vous avez écrit :
>>> But do you think this is possible ?
>> Sure. Resolving this sort of thing is the point of the Policy process,
>> after all, and we have a clear authority that does the enforcement
>> (ftp-master), so it se
Le Friday 20 March 2009 15:54:14 Noah Slater, vous avez écrit :
> Not sure what else you expect someone to respond with apart from throwing
> their hands up and conceding that we should adopt policy to conform with
> peoples wish to avoid additional work.
You know, if you get some agressive answer
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:45:09 +0100 (CET)
Andreas Tille wrote:
> I tried to find a clear advise how to reasonable format lists inside long
> descriptions of packages. The only thing I know is that lines with two
> leading spaces is considered verbose.
Packages.gz is already 26Mb - I'd like to f
Romain Beauxis writes:
> Sorry, but there was also an argument below in my message.
>
> The point is that there are possibly a lot of corner cases, such as the
> autotools case, for which we can't really decide and list every single
> issue or produce a general rational.
>
> Since the vast majori
On Fri, 2009-03-20 at 19:03 +, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:45:09 +0100 (CET)
> Andreas Tille wrote:
>
> > I tried to find a clear advise how to reasonable format lists inside long
> > descriptions of packages. The only thing I know is that lines with two
> > leading spaces
Neil Williams wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:45:09 +0100 (CET)
> Andreas Tille wrote:
>
>> I tried to find a clear advise how to reasonable format lists inside long
>> descriptions of packages. The only thing I know is that lines with two
>> leading spaces is considered verbose.
>
> Packages.
Hi Joss,
Josselin Mouette wrote:
> 1. GNOME-PYTHON
> I propose to file wishlist bugs on the packages that can move to using
> python-gconf.
> 2. GNOME-PYTHON-DESKTOP
> I propose to file important bugs on all packages depending on
> python-gnome2-desktop, making them RC once the package is remo
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 20:08:43 +0100
Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-03-20 at 19:03 +, Neil Williams wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:45:09 +0100 (CET)
> > Andreas Tille wrote:
> >
> > > I tried to find a clear advise how to reasonable format lists inside long
> > > descriptions of pack
Martín Ferrari wrote:
> Hi,
Hi
In our call to move away from net-tools, I want to first start with
identifying the packages that still use it:
> * ifconfig, route: the most difficult ones, both can be replaced by
> calls to "ip", maybe except for some obscure options.
> * netstat : sstat provi
Le Friday 20 March 2009 19:55:29 Emilio Pozuelo Monfort, vous avez écrit :
> > Since the vast majority of the packages fall into a regular copyright and
> > licensing, this would also mean overload the policy with stuff that is
> > only relevant in a very small number of cases in proportion.
>
> If
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 12:01:59PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Freitag, 20. März 2009, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> > The kernel team seems to have a full waiver for listing copyright
> > holders.
> AFAIK linux-kbuild-2.6.28 was rejected from NEW for this very reason.
That's not entirely clear. T
Hi,
I noticed that the autobuilt webkit on amd64 depends on the sqlite
library package from experimental. This sounds pretty unfortunate, as
webkit doesn't require a specific version of libsqlite, and would work
fine with the unstable one. On the other hand, as a user, I would be
quite disappointe
On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 12:57:25AM +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> 920 cdrom://Lenny_DVD_1 lenny/main Packages
> 900 ftp://ftp2.de.debian.org lenny/main Packages
> 980 http://security.debian.org lenny/updates/main Packages
[...]
> Can someone explain, WHY the SECURITY mirro
hi,
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 08:33:55PM +0200, Omer Zak wrote:
> My wish is that modularization of Debian packages be improved. It means
> that it'll be possible to uninstall all games in a PC and continue to
> have functioning KDE. Likewise - TeX.
in cases where it can function without the extr
CCing -devel, as I'd need some advice on how to properly handle this, as it
might introduce some security issues.
On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 08:29:52 +0100, Julien Valroff wrote:
> Package: wicd
> Version: 1.5.9-4
> Severity: normal
>
> Hi David,
Hello Julien,
> I have just noticed sudo needs to be i
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
