Control: tags 1023056 moreinfo
Control: tags 1023057 moreinfo
Axel Beckert:
Hi Niels,
Niels Thykier wrote:
I understand that you are unsatisfied with this proposal and that is
fair.
Thanks.
Though from my point of view, your email makes it hard for me to want to
engage with you to find a
Hi Niels,
Thank you for this work.
Personally I have only one point I'd like to raise:
On Sat, Oct 29, 2022 at 08:55:38PM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
> * debian/README.Debian
> * debian/TODO
>
> These have historically been installed into the main package and a note in
> debhelper
Hi Niels,
Niels Thykier wrote:
> I understand that you are unsatisfied with this proposal and that is
> fair.
Thanks.
> Though from my point of view, your email makes it hard for me to want to
> engage with you to find a solution that would (ideally) satisfy your desires
I'm sorry, but at that
Axel Beckert:
Hi,
I am looking at making `debian/foo` an error by default in debhelper compat
15 (triggering a warning from compat 14).
Uargh, yet another bad decision which makes one want to no more using
debhelper. :-(
Hi Axel,
I understand that you are unsatisfied with this proposal
Hi,
> I am looking at making `debian/foo` an error by default in debhelper compat
> 15 (triggering a warning from compat 14).
Uargh, yet another bad decision which makes one want to no more using
debhelper. :-(
> > > This kind of packaging, with some packaging files under debian/ having an
> >
Control: clone -1 -2 -3
Control: reassign -2 lintian
Control: reassign -3 lintian-brush
Control: block -3 by -2
Control: block -3 by -1
Control: block -2 by -1
Hi,
CC'ing relevant maintainers for clone + reassign for lintian +
lintian-brush.
I am looking at making `debian/foo` an error by
On Sun, Aug 14, 2022 at 03:55:05PM +0200, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> * gregor herrmann [220814 13:53]:
> > On Thu, 07 Jul 2022 08:48:36 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > This kind of packaging, with some packaging files under debian/ having an
> > > associated binary package name and some not,
* gregor herrmann [220814 13:53]:
> On Thu, 07 Jul 2022 08:48:36 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> > This kind of packaging, with some packaging files under debian/ having an
> > associated binary package name and some not, is an antipattern.
>
> +1
[..]
> > I would like to suggest that in the
On Thu, 07 Jul 2022 08:48:36 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> This kind of packaging, with some packaging files under debian/ having an
> associated binary package name and some not, is an antipattern.
+1
(I also don't like packaging files without binary package name for
single-binary source
Package: debhelper
Version: 13.8
Severity: wishlist
User: ubuntu-de...@lists.ubuntu.com
Usertags: origin-ubuntu kinetic
Hi Niels,
I was recently doing work on a package where, for $reasons, I was deleting a
binary package from debian/control.
This had very bad side effects, because the debian/
10 matches
Mail list logo
