On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 08:08:45PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Sat, 2008-06-07 at 22:40 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
[...]
With this patch applied, I think that these bugs are now moot, but I
wanted to check before closing them. Is there any further work required
in britney to treat
On Sat, 2008-06-07 at 22:40 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
[...]
With this patch applied, I think that these bugs are now moot, but I
wanted to check before closing them. Is there any further work required
in britney to treat urgencies as case-insensitive, or does the change in
the log file
But I might look at patches changing it (or better, bzr trees ready to
merge), if someone really wants it changed.
Patch attached. I can also create a bzr repository if that's helpful.
For the future - yes please. Including a changelog entry.
I also added a fix for logging that I'm not
Joerg Jaspert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Patch attached. I can also create a bzr repository if that's helpful.
For the future - yes please. Including a changelog entry.
Will do in the future.
Britney uses it, but its not needed at that point, as p_a will read the
stuff out of the .dak file
On 11408 March 1977, Joey Hess wrote:
The code in dak, in the current form, is there since 2002-02-13, when
jennifer (today process_unchecked) got added to the repository. Most
probably something similar existed in the code before this.
Its also nearly unchanged since then, with changes being
On 11407 March 1977, Russ Allbery wrote:
You make it sound like it's an ASN.1 encoder or something. If Joerg says
that he absolutely won't change dak,
I wont change it.
But I might look at patches changing it (or better, bzr trees ready to
merge), if someone really wants it changed.
Why
On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 14:52:04 -0700, Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Luk Claes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I thought policy was documenting practice and not the other way
around?
Hm, no, that's not my perception of Policy. New Policy changes should
reflect practice in Debian first
Joerg Jaspert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 11407 March 1977, Russ Allbery wrote:
You make it sound like it's an ASN.1 encoder or something. If Joerg
says that he absolutely won't change dak,
I wont change it.
But I might look at patches changing it (or better, bzr trees ready to
merge),
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
The code in dak, in the current form, is there since 2002-02-13, when
jennifer (today process_unchecked) got added to the repository. Most
probably something similar existed in the code before this.
Its also nearly unchanged since then, with changes being cosmetical.
Nice
Sorry, please reply to this message rather than the other. I got the
wrong bug number and sent this to Lintian instead of to Policy.
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
After discussion with Joerg Jaspert, I'm of the opinion that dak is the
canonical place for valid urgencies to be set.
Russ Allbery wrote:
Sorry, please reply to this message rather than the other. I got the
wrong bug number and sent this to Lintian instead of to Policy.
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
After discussion with Joerg Jaspert, I'm of the opinion that dak is the
canonical place for
Luk Claes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I thought policy was documenting practice and not the other way around?
Hm, no, that's not my perception of Policy. New Policy changes should
reflect practice in Debian first unless the problem is significant enough
that Policy needs to pick a side before
Russ Allbery wrote:
Luk Claes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I thought policy was documenting practice and not the other way around?
Hm, no, that's not my perception of Policy. New Policy changes should
reflect practice in Debian first unless the problem is significant enough
that Policy
Luk Claes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Russ Allbery wrote:
Of course, if someone believes Policy is wrong, they can always propose
to change it. In this case, though, I think Policy's current position
is also the correct technical one to take.
Good luck with convincing the ones implementing
14 matches
Mail list logo
