On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 01:19:31PM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
If not, why are you claiming to replace their code? It's fine to be
writing something else to replace older code; but it's fairly rude to
be claiming that whatever
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 03:53:42PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Wrong. It will be a new thing, not related to the previous thing.
It's evidently related: if not in terms of actual reused code but in terms
of who is expected to use it and what it is to be used for.
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 08:03:02AM +0100, Philipp Kern wrote:
I'd prefer if such a tool could replace an existing one. Why not aim at
replacing dput if there's a reason for it?
I must concur. I can't see the reason for dput, dupload and dput-ng to
co-exist. If dput-ng has the momentum and is a
I'd prefer if such a tool could replace an existing one. Why not aim at
replacing dput if there's a reason for it?
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Hi,
On 28.10.2012 08:03, Philipp Kern wrote:
I'd prefer if such a tool could replace an existing one. Why not aim at
replacing dput if there's a reason for it?
As for us, we'd welcome that. However, that's primarily left to the
current dput maintainer and his interest in that. Also note, we
* Arno Töll:
dput-ng features many enhancements over dput, such as more
comprehensive checks, an easy to use plugin system, and code
designed to handle the numerous archives that any Debian package
hacker will interact with.
Does it prevent uploading security updates to the main archive by
Hi,
On 28.10.2012 13:57, Florian Weimer wrote:
Does it prevent uploading security updates to the main archive by
default?
Adam, with his Release Team hat on, suggested us to prevent this for
t-p-u likewise. We have the infrastructure and possibilities to
implement a check like this, and it is
On 28.10.2012 13:06, Arno Töll wrote:
On 28.10.2012 13:57, Florian Weimer wrote:
Does it prevent uploading security updates to the main archive by
default?
Adam, with his Release Team hat on, suggested us to prevent this for
t-p-u likewise.
I think it was p-u, but more as a grumble about an
Hi,
On 28.10.2012 14:15, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On 28.10.2012 13:06, Arno Töll wrote:
On 28.10.2012 13:57, Florian Weimer wrote:
Does it prevent uploading security updates to the main archive by
default?
Adam, with his Release Team hat on, suggested us to prevent this for
t-p-u likewise.
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 11:15:47AM +0100, Arno Töll wrote:
Hi,
On 28.10.2012 08:03, Philipp Kern wrote:
I'd prefer if such a tool could replace an existing one. Why not aim at
replacing dput if there's a reason for it?
As for us, we'd welcome that. However, that's primarily left to the
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 05:25:20PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 11:15:47AM +0100, Arno Töll wrote:
Hi,
On 28.10.2012 08:03, Philipp Kern wrote:
I'd prefer if such a tool could replace an existing one. Why not aim at
replacing dput if there's a reason for it?
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
If not, why are you claiming to replace their code? It's fine to be
writing something else to replace older code; but it's fairly rude to
be claiming that whatever you're writing is the next generation of
that older code
Any rewrite
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 02:40:53PM +0100, Arno Töll wrote:
Yes, I know it still lacks code name aliases, but that's something we
are aware of. Also, the user prompting interface is not very clean yet :)
Please make sure that it can be overridden on the commandline, thanks.
Kind regards
Philipp
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Arno Töll a...@debian.org
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Arno Töll a...@debian.org
thanks
* Package name: dput-ng
Version : 1.0.0
Upstream Author : Arno Töll a...@debian.org, Paul Tagliamonte
paul...@debian.org
* URL :
14 matches
Mail list logo
