On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Brian S. Julin wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Curtis Veit wrote:
> > does not actually hold packages, so perhaps one of these?
> >
> > dist/
> > package/
> > packing/
> > or
> > pack/
>
> I think "distro" has a nice trendy ring to it, personally :-)
>
> This would be a good compromise, because the debian directory can
> either be ignored, or linked to ./debian by the debian .diff file
> if the materials in there are indeed in sync with the Debian
> maintainer's work.
It doesn't matter for me, which name this directory has. The maintainers
should decide. IMO it should just be a somewhat self-explaining name. The
most important issue is, that we have only _one_ directory for _all_
packaging files.
If a packager (i.e. the debian one) wanna have libgii/debian instead of
libgii/<directory-to-packaging-files>/debian, then he may symlink it.
> > Any comments on the suggestion to *only* support
> > the generation of the source file for distros
> > with the build system?
>
> Well, that's what I'd like, but that isn't as important to me, and
> it is not what Thayne would like, and he's the one who talked himself
> into being the "build system guy," which has to be worth something
> in bargaining power :-)
Yep. :) See above.
> I mailed the listed Debian Maintainer a few days ago, and no response
> yet. Perhaps if you were also to send him mail, we'd get his
> attention :-)
Agree.
CU,
Christoph Egger
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
