[This is the policy bug.]
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 5:18 PM Sean Whitton wrote:
>
> the relevant sentence of Policy ... was intended to be
> informative, not normative.
Just a brief post scriptum: I had to disable a test in Lintian due to
new restrictions on version strings in Dpkg. The comm
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 5:18 PM Sean Whitton wrote:
>
> the relevant sentence of Policy ... was intended to be
> informative, not normative.
Just a brief post scriptum: I had to disable a test in Lintian due to
new restrictions on version strings in Dpkg. The commit message has
more documen
control: tag -1 +pending
Hello Ian,
On Tue 16 Jun 2020 at 12:11PM +01, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I think "native package versions" refers to "versionn numbers which
> are supposed to be Debian-native", not "the version numbers of
> native-format packages".
>
> Can I suggest that this sentence might b
Sean Whitton writes ("Re: Bug#953554: Please permit Debian revisions with 1.0
native packages [and 1 more messages]"):
> I believe that the relevant sentence of Policy, added in policy.git
> commit eee39aecef3a6a5f9927211b5c847e645e927cbd, was intended to be
> informative, not
Felix Lechner writes ("Re: Bug#953554: Please permit Debian revisions with 1.0
native packages [and 1 more messages]"):
> Hi Sean,
...
> Based on your note, however, Lintian will stop warning about such
> version mismatches. Perhaps it will gradually pave the way for a
&g
Hi Sean,
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 5:18 PM Sean Whitton wrote:
>
> As
> discussion is ongoing in the context of Lintian, that seems premature,
> however.
The Lintian discussion was merged into a bug Guillem had filed to
further enshrine the division between native and non-native packages
Bug#94415
Hello,
On Wed 11 Mar 2020 at 12:30PM GMT, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Felix Lechner writes ("Re: Bug#953554: Please permit Debian revisions with
> 1.0 native packages [and 1 more messages]"):
>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 4:58 AM Ian Jackson
>> wrote:
>> >
>>
Hi Ian,
On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 5:37 AM Ian Jackson
wrote:
>
> I hope that whatever occurs more widely, this particular message can
> be downgraded appropriately so that by default it is an warning rather
> than an error. That's all I'm asking for in this bug.
Unless someone objects, I will dow
Chris Lamb writes ("Re: Bug#953554: Please permit Debian revisions with 1.0
native packages [and 1 more messages]"):
> Ian Jackson wrote:
> > I have no problem with this being a lintian warning. In this bug I am
> > requesting this "error" to be returned to i
Control: clone -1 -2
Control: reassign -2 debian-policy
Felix Lechner writes ("Re: Bug#953554: Please permit Debian revisions with 1.0
native packages [and 1 more messages]"):
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 4:58 AM Ian Jackson
> wrote:
> >
> > It works today. The only pr
Ian Jackson wrote:
> I have no problem with this being a lintian warning. In this bug I am
> requesting this "error" to be returned to its previous status as a
> warning.
It was not previously clear to me that this was the case.
> I have indeed used an override. But I am worried. I perceive t
Hi Ian,
On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 4:58 AM Ian Jackson
wrote:
>
> It works today. The only problem is the lintian warning.
Doesn't policy stand in the way too?
> I perceive this as
> part of a campaign to abolish one of my workflows. I am scared that
> in the future an attempt may be made to act
Felix Lechner writes ("Re: Bug#953554: Please permit Debian revisions with 1.0
native packages"):
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 7:51 AM Ian Jackson
> wrote:
> > I am packaging a small program for which I am the upstream. It does
> > not make sense to use a complicated source format; 1.0 native is
>
13 matches
Mail list logo
