On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 03:43:19PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 12:20:28PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 04:40:43PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > >
> > > This is one of the cases that now has a better solution and more standard
> > > tools than
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 04:11:14PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
>
> When the new copyright format was introduced, it was agreed there
> would be no compulsion to migrate to the new copyright format.
>
> There is nothing that prevent to add Files-Excluded stanzas to old
> format copyright files fo
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 12:20:28PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 04:40:43PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >
> > This is one of the cases that now has a better solution and more standard
> > tools than the get-orig-source target, specifically Files-Excluded in
> > debian/cop
Hi,
On 07/03/2018 01:20 PM, Bill Allombert wrote:
> How many packages are using Files-Excluded ?
1781
Using codesearch.d.o [1] to look through the debian/copyright files, then
running
curl -s https://codesearch.debian.net/results/2d02749753b89563/packages.json |
jq -r '.Packages[]' | wc -l
ge
On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 04:40:43PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Jonathan Nieder writes:
>
> > Context: I have run into a few packages that used the +dfsg convention
> > without documenting what they removed from the tarball and I was not
> > able to locally update them. :(
>
> This is one of the
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 09:39:39AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > After the removal I will surely stick to my personal policy but for an
> > explanation who to implement it in a somehow standardized way I need do
> > add extra information now.
>
> You would already have to add some extra informati
Andreas Tille writes:
> I think additional information in README.source is a very helpful thing
> to have. However, my *personal* policy for sponsoring a package is that
> I will not sponsor a package that comes without a method that enables me
> automatically to reproduce the upstream source ta
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 01:54:58PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Ian Jackson writes:
>
> > (ii) You make a very good argument that policy should continue to give
> > guidance for this kind of situation. The target should probably be
> > put back in policy, but with an explicit note saying it's no
Hello,
On Wed, Apr 11 2018, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I'm pretty reluctant to specify this sort of optional target that
> works differently in every package that uses it back in Policy because
> it's really not standardized, nor do I think it's possible to
> standardize. If we really want to write s
Ian Jackson writes:
> (ii) You make a very good argument that policy should continue to give
> guidance for this kind of situation. The target should probably be
> put back in policy, but with an explicit note saying it's not normally
> desirable, or something.
I think the Policy guidance is th
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 03:49:17PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Bill Allombert writes ("Re: Bug#515856: Debian Policy 4.1.4.0 released"):
> > I wonder, maybe uscan could support debian/get-orig-source as a last
> > resort ?
>
> Only if you pass --trust-source o
Bill Allombert writes ("Re: Bug#515856: Debian Policy 4.1.4.0 released"):
> I wonder, maybe uscan could support debian/get-orig-source as a last
> resort ?
Only if you pass --trust-source or something. Currently I think
(hope!) the damage that can be done by a bad uscan config i
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 03:18:32PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 10:58:53AM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote:
> > >
> > > Imho Sean's last mail sums it up pretty well
> > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=515856#94
> >
> > I have read this, but it does not convi
13 matches
Mail list logo