Well, considering that you had
./07/tek2ps/ have been removed from sources
where exactly is the problem that you can not give pattern by pattern
comments?
Yep. Perhaps, this is a reason to improve this comment.
Anyway, I would like to adopt something like this
for others my packages
It is not (yet) in DEP5 but the patch made it in devscripts Git. What
drawbacks do you mean?
For example, this:
--8--
One drawback of the Files-Excluded method was mentioned: There is no
reasonable way to give file by file (rather pattern by pattern)
comment why the file(s) were removed.
--8--
On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 12:58:41PM +0400, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
It is not (yet) in DEP5 but the patch made it in devscripts Git. What
drawbacks do you mean?
For example, this:
--8--
One drawback of the Files-Excluded method was mentioned: There is no
reasonable way to give file by
Ok, done (grabbed from the nlopt package).
OK (not brave enough to try the new uscan which would have saved you
from this get-orig-source thingy by adding a single line to d/copyright?
What are you talking about?
Yep. BTW, config model (see below) would have changed to 3.9.4
On Sun, Dec 01, 2013 at 07:19:51PM +0400, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
Ok, done (grabbed from the nlopt package).
OK (not brave enough to try the new uscan which would have saved you
from this get-orig-source thingy by adding a single line to d/copyright?
What are you talking about?
I
On Sun, Dec 01, 2013 at 11:23:20PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
What are you talking about?
I think I've recommendet you reading
https://wiki.debian.org/UscanEnhancements
Indeed, I've forgot this reference. But it seems,
this out of the dep5 standard for now, isn't? And this
approach has
On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 04:18:31AM +0400, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
On Sun, Dec 01, 2013 at 11:23:20PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
What are you talking about?
I think I've recommendet you reading
https://wiki.debian.org/UscanEnhancements
Indeed, I've forgot this reference. But it
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 01:40:20AM +0400, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 10:06:59PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
I checked out the git repository and have the following remarks:
1. in d/README.source you wrote:
./07/tek2ps/ have been removed from sources
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 10:06:59PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
I checked out the git repository and have the following remarks:
1. in d/README.source you wrote:
./07/tek2ps/ have been removed from sources
It is OK to remove things from upstream source if needed but this
Hi Sergey,
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 11:12:33PM +0400, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:48:17AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
I checked the Blends tasks whether the package is mentioned there but I
can not find it. If you want me to sponsor according to my SoB
effort[1]
On Thu, 21 Nov 2013 23:11:42 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
3. To old Standards-Version
Now 3.9.5, it's ok?
Yep. BTW, config model (see below) would have changed to 3.9.4
automatically but 3.9.5 is really the latest policy version (cme is
lagging behind a bit).
Not anymore -- I just
11 matches
Mail list logo
