Bug#1069139: developers-reference: out-of-date section "Make transition packages deborphan compliant"

2024-04-21 Thread Holger Levsen
On Sat, Apr 20, 2024 at 08:30:52PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > While I fully support properly marking obsolete packages by putting > them in the (unfortunately misnamed :) oldlibs section (well excluding > library-like depended on packages that get dropped as a mater of course). > I wanted to

Bug#1069139: developers-reference: out-of-date section "Make transition packages deborphan compliant"

2024-04-20 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! On Wed, 2024-04-17 at 04:24:16 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > Package: developers-reference > Version: 13.5 > Severity: normal > Now that the deborphan package has been removed from unstable, > the section "Make transition packages deborphan compliant" in > "Best Packaging Practices" is out

Bug#1069139: developers-reference: out-of-date section "Make transition packages deborphan compliant"

2024-04-17 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi Vincent, On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 04:24:16AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > Now that the deborphan package has been removed from unstable, > the section "Make transition packages deborphan compliant" in > "Best Packaging Practices" is out of date and should be updated. > > See

Bug#1069139: developers-reference: out-of-date section "Make transition packages deborphan compliant"

2024-04-16 Thread Vincent Lefevre
Package: developers-reference Version: 13.5 Severity: normal Now that the deborphan package has been removed from unstable, the section "Make transition packages deborphan compliant" in "Best Packaging Practices" is out of date and should be updated. See