Control: tags -1 -pending
Control: noowner -1
On Sun, 2014-09-21 at 23:41 +0200, Markus Koschany wrote:
Hello Tobias,
On 21.09.2014 18:26, Tobias Frost wrote:
Am Saturday, den 20.09.2014, 17:33 +0200 schrieb Markus Koschany:
[...]
I said I could duplicate the code but I feel that we gain
On Sun, 2014-09-21 at 03:50 +0300, Peter Pentchev wrote:
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 10:10:00AM +0200, Christian Kastner wrote:
Hi Markus,
On 2014-09-20 01:22, Markus Koschany wrote:
The debian/copyright file is identical for ufoai-data, ufoai-music and
ufoai-maps.
I find this
Am Saturday, den 20.09.2014, 17:33 +0200 schrieb Markus Koschany:
On 20.09.2014 15:45, Tobias Frost wrote:
[...]
I agree with you that we both waste time here. I still think the comment
in debian/copyright and the nature of the split would justify a
unified d/copyright file but I intend to
Hello Tobias,
On 21.09.2014 18:26, Tobias Frost wrote:
Am Saturday, den 20.09.2014, 17:33 +0200 schrieb Markus Koschany:
[...]
I said I could duplicate the code but I feel that we gain nothing with
it since I'm the only one who has to work with those packages.
According d/control this
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
On Sat, 2014-09-20 at 01:22 +0200, Markus Koschany wrote:
Hi Tobias,
thanks for taking your time for this.
On 19.09.2014 23:51, Tobias Frost wrote:
Control: -1 moreoinfo
Hi Markus,
so, let's start with -music
First of all I'd like to suggest that
On 20.09.2014 09:57, Tobias Frost wrote:
[...]
First of all I'd like to suggest that you start with the ufoai source
package first because it contains the ufoai_copyright.py script and
other information that are useful to understand the packaging of
UFO:AI's data packages.
My reasoning is,
Hallo Markus,
Am Saturday, den 20.09.2014, 13:02 +0200 schrieb Markus Koschany:
On 20.09.2014 09:57, Tobias Frost wrote:
[...]
I still don't see why the current copyright file does not meet Debian's
quality requirements. Instead of one huge 900 MB -data package, the game
data was simply
Addendum:
On Sat, 2014-09-20 at 15:45 +0200, Tobias Frost wrote:
Absolutely agreed. But can you point me to examples where the short
reference to /usr/share/common-licenses was deemed not appropriate by
the FTP team?
From
On 20.09.2014 16:02, Tobias Frost wrote:
Addendum:
On Sat, 2014-09-20 at 15:45 +0200, Tobias Frost wrote:
Absolutely agreed. But can you point me to examples where the short
reference to /usr/share/common-licenses was deemed not appropriate by
the FTP team?
From
Hi Markus,
sorry for taking part of the discussion.
If you think the FTP master position is contraddittory I suggest you to open a
thread in debian-devel with ftpmasters cc'ed.
Anyway in my opinion duplicating the lines is better also because copyright
file is shown in
On 20.09.2014 15:45, Tobias Frost wrote:
[...]
The split is not under dispute. Other packages do that too, for example
redeclipse. But redeclipse do it right (in my view) and their
generate-copyright-script which is aware of the package it acts on.
(Your script can be enhanced to do that too.
Control: -1 moreoinfo
Hi Markus,
so, let's start with -music
- d/copyright contains *many* files not in this package.
Please clean up the file. (Also, please use wildcards;
this makes it far easier to review)
Seems that a base/ prefix slipped in the -music part of d/copyright?
Nitpick*: It
Hi Tobias,
thanks for taking your time for this.
On 19.09.2014 23:51, Tobias Frost wrote:
Control: -1 moreoinfo
Hi Markus,
so, let's start with -music
First of all I'd like to suggest that you start with the ufoai source
package first because it contains the ufoai_copyright.py script and
13 matches
Mail list logo
