Your message dated Tue, 21 Nov 2017 09:46:32 -0500
with message-id <20171121144631.GB11077@freya>
and subject line Re: Bug#881633: Creation of vim-python3 virtual package
has caused the Debian Bug report #881633,
regarding Creation of vim-python3 virtual package
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
881633: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=881633
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: debian-policy
Version: 4.1.1.1
Severity: wishlist
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Following steps in [1], here is the wishlist bug for creating
a `vim-python3` virtual package, homologous to the already present
`vim-python` virtual package.
It will allow vim python3 plugins to require on it.
This solves python-neovim bug #872942 [2].
Cheers.
[1]: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/virtual-package-names-
list.txt
[2]: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=872942
- -- System Information:
Debian Release: buster/sid
APT prefers testing-debug
APT policy: (500, 'testing-debug'), (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386
Kernel: Linux 4.13.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8),
LANGUAGE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
Versions of packages debian-policy depends on:
ii libjs-sphinxdoc 1.6.5-2
debian-policy recommends no packages.
Versions of packages debian-policy suggests:
pn doc-base <none>
- -- no debconf information
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEELLKv6mdE0z94m2FAIj8VylqvDngFAloJ5cAACgkQIj8Vylqv
DnjQRQgAxApd1WoYBqMX8c0EUzCcBpalo52JXY3ozfU/ERLrRyh7BmHAw5+ycmqy
n0aCszJtpKBImsYSvzvmMTPuqXMsoP7VXrsaxHzNFnjpJhT1No4yI8+WPUCf9hRf
GyFgcrwjt/9/87QfNDaSammBAVhkffZnMIA/nOkR/oGvXjc86RHdmQr2iMdm5Sq+
cIpzRQ5phf6zuCyTAvnDypJ4VLCBUgR3NFhWeZK9/uOAls+R3E9E6eAvERIjLd1x
q5qg9FwdhV5X7cBwOvFZLVHrPxryDY3O+efyaFWJVpSIiHfKcwAXbXqJkckKXQoE
sPBJKOZnDRBqWH75KJ3jqPMoYbHIlw==
=MM9c
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 09:51:30PM +0100, Víctor Cuadrado Juan wrote:
> On 16/11/17 00:20, James McCoy wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 10:15:31AM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> >> The point of listing virtual packages in Policy is to deal with
> >> disparate people maintaining packages that Provide the virtual package.
> >> If the people using the virtual packages are part of a tightly-knit
> >> packaging team, they can maintain the virtual packages themselves,
> >> without listing them in Policy.
> >
> > Ok. I had a recollection of that.
> >
> >> In light of this, could you confirm that this needs to go into Policy?
> >> I am not familiar with you Vim guys, what with being the co-maintainer
> >> of a dh_* tool for Emacs addons..
> >
> > I don't think so. Victor?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
>
> I'm ok too with it being out of policy. We can close this vim-python3 bug
> (#881633) and the vim-python one (#881642), then.
Ok. Done.
Cheers,
--
James
GPG Key: 4096R/91BF BF4D 6956 BD5D F7B7 2D23 DFE6 91AE 331B A3DB
--- End Message ---
