Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If I were to clean things up and make DAK easier to use for private > archives (eg. by isolating all Debian specific stuff, ideally into > a limited number *.conf files), would somebody be willing > to commit the changes to CVS?
No one sane agrees to pre-commit changes sight-unseen to CVS. Show me the changes, and we'll talk. > I suspect even though I might have write access to CVS, Err, no you don't and I have no idea what would made you suspect you might. > > like doc/README.names maybe. > > I found that very brief and vague. It is not made clear for instance, > what programs must be run before, what CWD must be in order to > run the program, etc. Duh. That's not the purpose of that document. You were whining about not being able to translate task to script name and vice versa; doc/README.names does that and that's why I mentioned it. > Command line parameters are simply not documented anywhere. Err, bullshit, there's doc/*.1.sgml and --help for most of the key scripts. > Some questions: > > 1. For package installations, DAK will inform both the uploader and the > maintainer. No, that's just the default. It's possible to override it through the config file. (Think about security.d.o: when was the last time you got notification for a security upload of your package?) > 2. Where is the code that moves unstable to testing? That does not > appear to be here? It's in the same CVS module in the 'testing' directory. You could have found that out yourself, had you bothered to look. > 3. Could the information in apt.conf be automatically generated from > kate.conf? Not all of it, no. Some of it, yes. > 4. When installing a new package (with lisa I think), how do you specify > with component {main,contrib,non-free} it will go into? You don't; the section field specifies that. That's not a katie question, that's a general Debian knowledge question and again something you could have found out yourself, had you bothered to look. > 5. Debian packaging. There is debian packaging. Do you actually bother looking at _anything_ before posting? I mean if you'd said "Improve the Debian packaging" it might not be so offensive but you seem to have a serious post-first-think/act-later problem. > Anyway, just some ideas. I am not sure if there is a dedicated > mailing list for this or not. There will be shortly. -- James