On Monday 26 January 2009 22:24:12 Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: --cut-- > > Sure, that particular README.Debian is somehow superfluous here (and > > could be removed in the next release, Jonathan: hint, hint, but no rush > > or you will need some jumbo sponsors ;-), since it duplicates > > descriptions given in the patches' headers. Debian.source (to be refered
To correct my errors first: `Debian.source' to be read as `debian/README.source' > > for package-specific practices when someone intends to NMU your package) > > and REAME.Debian-source (dfsg repackaged source) are not relevant also. > > I lobbied hard for keeping README.Debian in last time but I can see my > inexperience showing again :-) Nothing spectacular: /usr/share/doc/developers-reference/developers-reference.txt.gz > On review you are right, it duplicates > the patch headers - my aim was to keep the user informed, who will never > see them, but there isn't any real need. Having dups could be tiresome for anyone, discrepancies happen... OTOH dropping a patch would take its description out as well. -- pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
