Francesco wrote:
Io sono piu' dell'idea di integrare i documenti esistenti e ottenere
il consenso sul merge di informazioni non ancora presenti da altre
fonti.
Nessun meta manuale, l'idea è proprio quella che hai appena descritto:
non reinventare la ruota e quindi integrare il più possibile
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 07:26:11AM +0200, Luca Brivio wrote:
One of the biggest problems we experienced is that the existing
documentation,
albeit useful and rather rich, is not coherent. I think we need something
more homogeneous, backed by an overall design. This would not be
On Aug 19, 2007, at 2:24 AM, Luca Brivio wrote:
Alle mer 15 agosto 2007, martin f krafft ha scritto:
also sprach Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[2007.08.10.1746 +0200]:
Martin Krafft and I jointly gave a talk at Debconf about
use of
distributed version control systems for
Alle mer 15 agosto 2007, martin f krafft ha scritto:
also sprach Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007.08.10.1746 +0200]:
Martin Krafft and I jointly gave a talk at Debconf about use of
distributed version control systems for Debian packages (this is the
quilt/dpatch/other
Luca Brivio [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BTW, does anybody have any concerns about the licensing?
Yes. Please choose a license that is uncontroversially free within
Debian. This excludes the GNU FDL and the Creative Commons licenses.
My recommendation would be either the GNU GPL or the Expat
also sprach Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007.08.10.1746 +0200]:
Martin Krafft and I jointly gave a talk at Debconf about use of
distributed version control systems for Debian packages (this is the
quilt/dpatch/other dimension); I would be happy to help documenting
that
On Wed, 8 Aug 2007 13:50:53 +0200, Luca Brivio [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Indeed, it looks at me that one of most exciting and challenging goals
would be to outline (and hence describe in a detailed manner) all of
the different existing styles and compare them after several points of
view, so
Luca Brivio [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
One of the biggest problems we experienced is that the existing
documentation, albeit useful and rather rich, is not coherent. I
think we need something more homogeneous, backed by an overall
design. This would not be yet-another-document to read, instead
Hello,
On 8/8/07, Davide Truffa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
we are a few wannabe-DD who think it would be really helpful to have a
comprehensive packaging manual covering just all technical topics about
making and maintaining Debian packages.
On 8/8/07, Luca Brivio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 05:57:15AM +0200, Davide Truffa wrote:
Hi all,
Tutto molto bello, mi piace l'iniziativa!, ... ma perché il cross post
su d-d-italian? :-)
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ... now what?
[EMAIL PROTECTED],debian.org,bononia.it} -%-
On Wed, 8 Aug 2007, Davide Truffa wrote:
Hi all,
we are a few wannabe-DD who think it would be really helpful to have a
comprehensive packaging manual covering just all technical topics about
making and maintaining Debian packages.
Since the beginning of July, I have started writing a book
On 8/8/07, François Févotte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
On 8/8/07, Davide Truffa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
we are a few wannabe-DD who think it would be really helpful to have a
comprehensive packaging manual covering just all technical topics about
making and maintaining Debian
On Wed, 8 Aug 2007 07:26:11 +0200, Luca Brivio [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Alle mer 8 agosto 2007, Ben Finney ha scritto:
Thanks for taking the initiative to do this work.
Thanks for your attention.
At this moment, we have the New Maintainers' Guide and a bunch of
other more or less good
Hello,
On 8/8/07, Davide Truffa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
we are a few wannabe-DD who think it would be really helpful to have a
comprehensive packaging manual covering just all technical topics about
making and maintaining Debian packages.
On 8/8/07, Luca Brivio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The
Hello!
On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 07:27:14 +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
One step might be to convert the New Maintainer's Guide into the
wiki format, then importing any missing information from the Debian
Developers' Reference to it. Putting it all in the wiki is good, so
that it is more easily
Alle mer 8 agosto 2007, Manoj Srivastava ha scritto:
The goal is from my POV to produce something much more complete and
with a different scope: while the NMG etc. are (roughly) tutorials
targeted to people who want to make their first packages etc., the DPH
would be a rich manual for all
Alle mer 8 agosto 2007, Luca Capello ha scritto:
Hello!
On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 07:27:14 +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
One step might be to convert the New Maintainer's Guide into the
wiki format, then importing any missing information from the Debian
Developers' Reference to it. Putting it
On Wed, 8 Aug 2007, Davide Truffa wrote:
Hi all,
we are a few wannabe-DD who think it would be really helpful to have a
comprehensive packaging manual covering just all technical topics about
making and maintaining Debian packages.
Since the beginning of July, I have started writing a book
Alle mer 8 agosto 2007, Lars Wirzenius ha scritto:
On ke, 2007-08-08 at 14:12 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
Without that structure, and a strict policy of being *only* an index
to existing documents, I don't see how this project would avoid
creating yet-another-document to read, compounding the
François Févotte ha scritto:
Thanks for the initiative. I entirely agree with you: I also use to
spend some time switching back and forth between the different
available documents, and I would definitely use such a unified,
comprehensive packaging manual.
We think this is exactly the problem
On 8/8/07, François Févotte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
On 8/8/07, Davide Truffa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
we are a few wannabe-DD who think it would be really helpful to have a
comprehensive packaging manual covering just all technical topics about
making and maintaining Debian
Nico Golde ha scritto:
I don't want to run down this idea but wouldn't the
result be nearly the same as the new maintainers guide +
developers reference + things you think are missing from the
current documentation but can be added?
Our intention is to create an exhaustive documentation
Davide Truffa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
we are a few wannabe-DD who think it would be really helpful to have
a comprehensive packaging manual covering just all technical topics
about making and maintaining Debian packages.
Thanks for taking the initiative to do this work.
At this moment, we
Alle mer 8 agosto 2007, Ben Finney ha scritto:
Thanks for taking the initiative to do this work.
Thanks for your attention.
At this moment, we have the New Maintainers' Guide and a bunch of
other more or less good tutorials, anyway when one wants to make an
even simple package she/he
Hi,
* Davide Truffa [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-08-08 06:00]:
we are a few wannabe-DD who think it would be really helpful to have a
comprehensive packaging manual covering just all technical topics about
making and maintaining Debian packages.
At this moment, we have the New Maintainers' Guide
Davide Truffa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
we are a few wannabe-DD who think it would be really helpful to have
a comprehensive packaging manual covering just all technical topics
about making and maintaining Debian packages.
Thanks for taking the initiative to do this work.
At this moment, we
Alle mer 8 agosto 2007, Ben Finney ha scritto:
Thanks for taking the initiative to do this work.
Thanks for your attention.
At this moment, we have the New Maintainers' Guide and a bunch of
other more or less good tutorials, anyway when one wants to make an
even simple package she/he
On ke, 2007-08-08 at 14:12 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
Without that structure, and a strict policy of being *only* an index
to existing documents, I don't see how this project would avoid
creating yet-another-document to read, compounding the problem you
initially described.
I think it makes
Luca Brivio [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
One of the biggest problems we experienced is that the existing
documentation, albeit useful and rather rich, is not coherent. I
think we need something more homogeneous, backed by an overall
design. This would not be yet-another-document to read, instead
29 matches
Mail list logo