On Monday, October 17, 2016 2:47:00 PM EDT M. J. Everitt wrote:
> On 17/10/16 14:44, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> >> If a binary package is provided in addition to its source-based
> >> equivalent, the name of the former should be suffixed with '-bin'
> >> for distinction."
> > 
> > Essentially what I would like to see in policy yes. Though it does not
> > address the problem of identifying packages that can be built from
> > source, that get put in tree as binary, for what ever reason.
> Perhaps you can compile a list of such packages, as I would imagine QA
> would be interested as to how 'widespread' this problem really is?

That is a good task, but might be seen as finger pointing or tattling. I am 
already an outcast. I rather let others, at least there is some awareness now. 

Though not sure what QA can do in the absence of some official policy to 
enforce, beyond making requests.

William L. Thomson Jr.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply via email to