Bug#736760: [Debian-med-packaging] debian/upstream vs. debian/upstream/signing-key.pgp

2014-02-06 Thread James McCoy
On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 09:48:43PM -0500, James McCoy wrote: On Sun, Feb 02, 2014 at 11:44:51AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: Le Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 05:06:22PM +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit : * working on the needed changes for UDD machine readable files gatherer Attached patch should

Bug#736760: [Debian-med-packaging] debian/upstream vs. debian/upstream/signing-key.pgp

2014-02-03 Thread James McCoy
On Sun, Feb 02, 2014 at 11:44:51AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: Le Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 05:06:22PM +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit : While I perfectly agree that it would have been the correct way to discuss claiming parts of the namespace first (heck, even if you do discuss changes for

Bug#736760: [Debian-med-packaging] debian/upstream vs. debian/upstream/signing-key.pgp

2014-02-03 Thread Charles Plessy
Le Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 09:48:43PM -0500, James McCoy a écrit : what is your take on this ? Will you start a discussion on debian-devel ? If people think that's worthwhile, I can. Unless I'm missing something, it seems like just transitioning to debian/upstream/ would be easier. Hi

Bug#736760: [Debian-med-packaging] debian/upstream vs. debian/upstream/signing-key.pgp

2014-02-01 Thread Charles Plessy
Le Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 05:06:22PM +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit : While I perfectly agree that it would have been the correct way to discuss claiming parts of the namespace first (heck, even if you do discuss changes for uscan at length like I did for Files-Excluded people raise their hands