Package: tech-ctte
Severity: normal
This is a delegation of the resolution of Bug#299007 to the Technical
Committee under points 1 and 3 of section 6.1 of the Constitution. As
Policy delegate, I am not comfortable making a final decision either
way on this bug and ask that the tech-ctte please
# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.35
reassign 504516 tech-ctte
retitle 504516 /usr/local/lib is writable by group staff and in default search
path
merge 504516 484841
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
there?
Also seems very much 18 century to have such hardcoded lists.
Not sure about this one, some investigation needed.
The qmail user and group IDs are already registered. See
/usr/share/doc/base-passwd/README.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle
severity as mailing
list interpretation of bounce messages above.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
and straightforward, and
it doesn't break git-daemon-run, maybe he'd be willing to consider it?
(I realize that he's still on vacation and we'll need to wait for him to
return to really complete this discussion.)
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle
lenny
and sid. Since then, the other libconfig has been uploaded as
libconfig.
Given that, I think this bug is moot and can just be closed.
I don't know if we have any special procedure for this, or if I should
just go ahead and close the bug as a tech-ctte member.
--
Russ Allbery (r
Don Armstrong d...@debian.org writes:
If there aren't any objections,[1] lets reassign this bug back to
src:libconfig while retitling and changing the severity to indicate the
problem.
Sounds good to me.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle
. The approach Gerrit proposes doesn't have
the migration problem.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
through
Mailman's outgoing SMTP server since Mailman now has to send a separate
message for every recipient. It's a great workaround for small lists and
not so great for large lists with lots of recipients at the same
destination server.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http
Adeodato Simó d...@net.com.org.es writes:
* Russ Allbery [Wed, 04 Feb 2009 14:02:21 -0800]:
It's a great workaround for small lists and not so great for large
lists with lots of recipients at the same destination server.
AFAIK the Debian lists use VERP, and they are, erm, not that small
or the best solutions,
but that's at least the answer to your question.
I think the ball is currently in the tech-ctte's court to respond to the
last message from Gerrit.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ
at the moment), so this is a known buggy area, but Policy feels like
the right place to handle it.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas
or not.)
I vote 1 2.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
pgpJiX7lTQJQD.pgp
Description: PGP signature
?
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
to
add Conflicts on packages that have never been in the archive?
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
. cdbs could if run in
the mode that regenerates debian/control, but of course that's not
automatic.
Now, if the maintainer added the Conflicts field with the substvar, then
yes, but it sounded like Steve doesn't think even that should be needed in
most cases?
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org
on this, for the record.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
is not being asked whether or
not the design of ia32-libs-tools is useful, but rather to overturn a
project delegate decision. This is a higher bar to meet.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
that they want to live with between the two
ugly solutions that have been put forward. If they think that ia32-libs
is less broken in the short term than ia32-libs-tools, I don't want to
argue with them, and I don't see a lot of compelling need to have both of
them.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org
:
This is even less helpful than the message to which I replied. I
guarantee that this style of argument will have absolutely no effect on my
opinion in a technical committee discussion.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
| instead of being rejected at RCPT TO time. After upload, the process
| outlined in option #2 will take effect.
|
| 4. Qmail is not to be allowed into Debian.
|
| 5. Further discussion.
I vote: 3 2 1 4 5
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle
.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
watching with interest and
keeping this in mind as something I might be able to help with down the
road if a rotation of duties looks like a good idea.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
at:
http://cr.yp.to/proto/qsbmf.txt
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 09:18:03PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Well, that's a specification for multipart/report, which qmail doesn't
attempt to comply with. (Neither do many other MTAs, although more do
now than used to.)
At a basic SMTP protocol
/08/msg00096.html
3. Further Discussion
I vote 1 3 2.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
pgpJWtTUvsIXR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
. Right now, it reads mostly as
requirements placed on agents editing /etc/aliases and the statement about
what /etc/aliases is for is presented as a definition rather than as a
requirement. I think the above was the intention, though.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http
are in /etc, (on my
laptop, I cound 1430[2]), a VCS which can't handle it isn't going to be
particularly useful for managing /etc.]
Yup. There are *many* packages in the archive that use symlinks in /etc.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
Aníbal Monsalve Salazar ani...@debian.org writes:
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 04:10:28PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
At first glance, the analysis in the bug log from Rémi Denis-Courmont
appears to be correct to me. Group mail is a privileged system group
which has read/write access to everyone's
Aníbal Monsalve Salazar ani...@debian.org writes:
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 05:13:32PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
I assume the underlying difficulty is that ssmtp doesn't have a
privilege separation built into the software the way that most UNIX
MTAs do, where there's a daemon running
is to consider it closed. If it comes up a few more times,
we can reconsider whether to work on a general rule, but it doesn't seem
to be coming up that horribly often at the moment.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
position.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87k4t38m9u@windlord.stanford.edu
criticial, and that
question is part of what the Release Team will have to decide.
Yup, I agree.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas
Andreas Barth a...@not.so.argh.org writes:
* Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) [100622 01:21]:
Having a different default on BSD than on other platforms strikes me as
asking for trouble (in particular, asking for obscure portability
issues to BSD systems that most developers don't test on).
I
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org writes:
I'm disturbed by the tone of some of the recent traffic which seems to
imply that Matthias must either personally respond to people's e-mail or
be completely removed from any role with the Python packages in order
for this complaint to be satisfied
Sandro Tosi mo...@debian.org writes:
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 23:50, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote:
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org writes:
I'm disturbed by the tone of some of the recent traffic which seems to
imply that Matthias must either personally respond to people's e-mail
that
the situation is improving (if it is).
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87630tqoof
Sandro Tosi mo...@debian.org writes:
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 05:22, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote:
I agree with the statement that maintainers of those packages need to
be active in these discussions and be clear about what their
requirements are and not block other work that's going
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 10:59:04AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Surprising. As a CTTE member, I'd prefer to change that to have the
same mailing list policy as all the other Debian mailing lists, and am
willing to put up with the small amount of spam
chats.)
Is this work targetted at squeeze?
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http
on the
right track.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/871v91s6mo
maintainers of lilo.
]
I vote:
B
A
further discussion
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
pgpdCllZQ5CMB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
in how this
is handled.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87y67c45rx
for
multiple packages. But writing the original -source package rules file is
arcane and very under-documented, so this is potentially a long-term
improvement.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
is that Matthias is not blocking forward progress here, so changing
maintainers doesn't seem to be required to continue to make progress.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe
to this, and I doubt there'd be much difficulty in getting CTTE
approval (assuming that it was even required, since if Matthias is happy
with the result, there's no need for the CTTE to take formal action).
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle
for Internet routers.
This was a topic of considerable discussion during the IPv6 design, since
of course everyone would have preferred to use arbitrary-length addresses
had it been possible.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
to report this problem to Red
Hat and/or VMware, since there's not a lot we can do about either product.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
, and is evaluating possible alternative solutions going forward. I
don't see a need for the technical committee to override their decisions
here.
Would anyone like to put forward any alternative proposed actions besides
declining to override the kernel team? Should we have a vote?
--
Russ Allbery (r
probably be something like:
2, 4, 1, 3, 5
I'm worried that make -qn is going to be too fragile. That method has
been tried before in Lintian checks IIRC and didn't work well.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian
for the leave package, but IIRC that was a test
case anyway and will just have to change.
So this may actually be fine.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble
be too aggressive.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/878vtezjz3
at this
stage.)
The TC is currently considering four different options, all of which are
either already implemented or fairly easy to implement in a short time
frame. I don't think all the options have to be at the point of being
appliable patches before the TC can consider something.
--
Russ
for some time, but people have great difficulty
coming up with another feature for which that would be the right solution.
Usually the problems that seem to point towards that solution are
better-solved through some other method, such as a helper in debian/rules.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org
.
I think this sounds like an excellent idea.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http
at the time, at least by my reading of the discussion, was
that this was a bit of flexibility that we didn't need and therefore
probably should eliminate in the name of simplifying the possible
implementation choices, rather than changing the Policy wording to allow
it.
--
Russ Allbery (r
this independent of whatever
else is going on. It won't hurt, and it could very well make any
long-term solution to the problem easier.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject
on this.)
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ipk10y1v@windlord.stanford.edu
Bdale Garbee bd...@gag.com writes:
I also believe we've had sufficient discussion about this issue, and I
therefore call for an immediate vote on the following ballot. My thanks
to Russ Allbery for help drafting the text.
I vote A, C, B.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http
a past precedent for how we handle publicizing tech-ctte
decisions?
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive
Bdale Garbee bd...@gag.com writes:
On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 12:18:46 -0800, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote:
Do we have a past precedent for how we handle publicizing tech-ctte
decisions?
Not really.
A note from the package maintainers calling for help testing would seem
most appropriate
Don Armstrong d...@debian.org writes:
I call for a vote on the kernel ABI numbering policy bug with the
following ballot:
A) The technical committee declines to override the kernel maintenance
team's ABI numbering policy.
B) Further discussion
END.
I vote AB.
--
Russ Allbery (r
to call for a vote in a few days.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org
for a vote on this ballot in a few
days.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org
Andreas Barth a...@ayous.org writes:
* Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) [120319 05:10]:
I would be happy to go forward with the GR to fix the supermajority rule
by itself, since I think it's uncontroversial and could be easily passed.
Good. In that case I think we should just call for votes
have any objections to that in terms of process or the outcomes
I'd expect, although that's rather a hard thing to ask someone to do.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject
than
continuing to make it my responsibility. But either way that's an option,
so I don't feel very strongly about it.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe
be a separate GR, though; I don't think it's really related
to the above procedural issues.
Certainly, yes, but we should hold it concurrently.
Do you have any opinions about wording, rationale, etc. ?
I'm okay with the wording above, personally.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org
-detection
are temporary to ease the transition but should be dropped at some
point (wheezy+1, or wheezy+2).
Debian Policy should be updated to make build-arch and build-indep
mandatory targets.
B. Further discussion
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org writes:
A. dpkg-buildpackage, when doing a binary-only build (-B), should probe
the package with make -qn to see if the build-arch target appears to
be implemented. If so, it should use debian/rules build-arch to
build the package instead of debian/rules
Stefano Zacchiroli lea...@debian.org writes:
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 09:57:02PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
D. The Technical Committee exercises our power under 6.1.2 of the
Constitution to designate:
- Luca Falavigna dktrkr...@debian.org
- Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org writes:
Based on Ian's last response, I think the ballot has two options plus
further discussion, since I'm quite sure that we're not going to outlaw
dh:
A. debian/rules is not required to be a makefile, only to implement the
same interface as a debian/rules
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org writes:
Based on Ian's last response, I think the ballot has two options plus
further discussion, since I'm quite sure that we're not going to outlaw
dh:
A. debian/rules is not required to be a makefile, only to implement the
same interface as a debian/rules
a legitimate technical reason---we will miss
the Wheezy multi-ls-option release goal.
I'm not familiar with this release goal. Could you point me at the
previous discussion and general project agreement on this as a release
goal?
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org writes:
Based on Ian's last response, I think the ballot has two options plus
further discussion, since I'm quite sure that we're not going to outlaw
dh:
A. debian/rules is not required to be a makefile, only to implement the
same interface as a debian/rules
(I'm not talking about asking
other members if they still have something pending), etc.
That would also be my definition of an effective team, yes.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
option but not Barry?)
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ty0435ku
of last resort. Renaming both programs is likely to be the
right move only in cases where both programs are pretty obscure and fairly
new.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject
to use the name have a substantial claim to it. But that
doesn't appear to be the case, and the renaming is mostly a matter of
fiddling with the inetd configuration on the system once.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
installs sounds better to me the more I think
about it, since that addresses the major concern of breaking someone's
system during an upgrade. It's not ideal in terms of making the conflict
go away, but it does address the problem going forward, if not on
currently-running systems.
--
Russ Allbery
Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com writes:
Russ Allbery wrote:
I believe at this point the dpkg-buildflags solution has proven
reasonably successful and is being widely deployed. I think we should
confirm that the TC agrees with that approach and close out this bug.
While I understand
.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87sjf8t2vg@windlord.stanford.edu
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
Ballot:
1. Approve transition plan for node and nodejs
2. Further discussion
I vote 12.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
pgpRS12K1aCoG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
this by possibly batching up the
amendments that we think we want to accept or make options and then voting
on them?
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble
,
but it would be nice to give a gentle shove towards defaulting to public
discussion.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
Constitutional Amendment- TC Supermajority Fix
[...]
Looks good to me.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject
.
The proposed texts of the two resulting options for the General
Resolution are as follows:
[...]
I think this is good to start with. I suspect there will be a lot of
discussion about what exactly this means, but I think the discussion is
the right next step.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org
a lot of difference.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87d344emvi
the ability to send mail over the
internet).
Counterproductive, perhaps? That's the best word that I can come up with
to capture my concern, which is that forcing some of these discussions to
be public would make the underlying problem considerably worse.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org
there to be a
lot of discussion.
amend-propose amendment procedure, to be appended to each
Seems fine.
Thanks for your work on this!
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
.
Looks good here.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87pq80nzpf
that repository) they were requesting the best
possible dependency resolution including the non-free repository. (This
is, to a large extent, exactly the point of contention in the Policy bugs
that I'm escalating.)
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle
non-free and install foo-nonfree.
That was one of the options offered in the Policy discussion.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas
prefer to use our existing processes rather than
using new processes to pre-discuss things for which there's already a
standard discussion process.
The GR should definitely be mentioned on -project to ensure that people
know that the discussion is happening.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org
business is always on the record.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87d33ub93l
investigated that.)
I'm not sure how significant that is to the decision, but it sounded like
people are assuming that having network-manager installed excludes use of
wicd or something else, so I want to be sure people aren't making
decisions based on false premises.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org
such that a dependency resolver may pull in
foo-nonfree in preference.
Thanks!
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http
Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org writes:
On 17.07.2012 22:30, Russ Allbery wrote:
If there's a clean way to disable network-manager, I think that's a
reasonable alternative to either creating yet another meta-package or
arguing about Depends vs. Recommends in gnome-core. But there seems
still a bug if a package in main pulls in a package from
non-free by default when non-free is enabled.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
it is not a good idea going
forward; the FDO standard is much easier for Debian to support in the long
run. I don't think there's any real debate here on the long-term
direction.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ
1 - 100 of 427 matches
Mail list logo
