Yup, that's true. So we'll keep it in -common! :) I still need to find the
time to rework them to make them as sensible as possible.
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 11:50 PM, Ondřej Surý ond...@sury.org wrote:
nginx-utils would only make sense in case the package would be Arch: any
First, thanks Thomas for relaying the bug in Ubuntu. I will try to
update both bugs when giving updates.
The project is still alive (here :
https://github.com/davromaniak/nginx_ensite). First, we wanted to add
them before the freeze of debian wheezy, but we thought the scripts
I plan to completely rewrite the logic in these scripts. I guess this would
be the third full rewrite. I will try to get to them today or tomorrow.
We discussed in the past whether this should be part of nginx-common or if
there should be an nginx-utils package added for
I think the point of consideration for splitting into another package is
this: For just these two scripts (one to enable a site, one to disable), do
we really need to split them off into their own package, and add that as a
dependency for all the versions of nginx, when we already have each
nginx-utils would only make sense in case the package would be Arch: any while
nginx-common is Arch: all.
And I guess the en/dis scripts are in a scripting language, right?
On 20. 12. 2012, at 1:29, Thomas Ward trekcaptainusa...@ubuntu.com wrote:
I think the point of
Mail list logo