On Sat, Jul 17, 1999 at 08:08:36PM +0200, Stefan Gybas wrote:
> Why is a program in the package allowed to change a conffile but not
> the postinst? The final result is the same: dpkg might ask if I want to
> replace the configuration file when I upgrade the package.
>
> I, for example, maintain g
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Stephane Bortzmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >Java extensions are called packages.
> >
> > Now why should genuine Python modules get a "lib" component in their
> > package name ?
>
> Because C conventions tend to be Unix conventions?
I would argue th
On 17-Jul-99, 13:08 (CDT), Stefan Gybas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>
> > * the maintainer scripts should not alter the conffile of ANY package,
> > including the one the scripts belong to.
> >
> > * the program itself in the package may modify the conffiles of other
> >
Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
>I'm not sure, but I think debian-java adopted a similar naming
>convention for their Java extensions; at least this is halfways true
>for the two packages I found in the archive (libpgjava and
>libgnu-regexp-java) and for the packages I saw discussed in the
>debian-java li
Hi,
>>"Darren" == Darren O Benham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Darren> Actually, I think developer disputes are handled by the technical
Darren> committee.
Fine. Forward it to them, then. The policy mailing list is
there to take care of *non-controversial* technical issues, and this
ha
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> * the maintainer scripts should not alter the conffile of ANY package,
> including the one the scripts belong to.
>
> * the program itself in the package may modify the conffiles of other
> packages (eg if the program is an editor or dotfiles-type package).
Why is a p
Roland Rosenfeld wrote:
> If there really is a technical problem with this link as mentioned by
> Santiago (I didn't check this myself), we can handle this symlink in
> postinst:
I second this proposal (I mean the whole symlink proposal, not just this
addition).
--
Stefan Gybas
On debian-policy, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My rationale for mandating a changelog.gz is for consitency, so you can
> easily find the changelog in every package.
>
> I don't have a rationale for requiring a html changelog, because that is
> already in policy. It went in last fall, I b
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> retitle 37251 [REJECTED] Software depending on non-US
Bug#37251: [AMENDMENT 1999/05/06] Software depending on non-US
Changed bug title.
> retitle 37262 [REJECTED] Software depending on non-US
Bug#37262: [AMENDMENT 1999/05/06] Software depending on non-
In the interests of seeing a solution to this problem happen soon and
before anymore maintainers take it upon themselves to decide how the
/usr/share/doc migration should happen, I second Manoj's proposal. I
would prefer the symlinks be managed seperately from the package that
needs them, but upon
retitle 37251 [REJECTED] Software depending on non-US
retitle 37262 [REJECTED] Software depending on non-US
severity 37251 fixed
severity 37262 fixed
thanks
These are pretty much no longer needed with the non-us restructure. The
proposal I made about patented but otherwise free stuff in non-us/no
Actually, I think developer disputes are handled by the technical
committee. However, how and when to close bugs is a behavioral thing
governing how a developer is supposed to behave with the Debian
organization, would that not be policy?
On Sat, Jul 17, 1999 at 02:20:08AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava
Hi,
>>"Santiago" == Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Santiago> Manoj, this bug was not a proposal to be accepted or rejected.
Santiago> I reassigned this bug to debian-policy because of a
Santiago> disagreement between the maintainer and the submitter,
Santiago> following Ian Jackson
Hi,
If I recall correctly, when we debated this on the policy
group, it was decided to put the guidelines in the developers
reference, and I made a wishlist bug against that package with
suggested wording.
*Any* valid bug against the policy package should either be a
b
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 38902 fixed
Bug#38902: [PROPOSED] data section
Severity set to `fixed'.
> retitle 38902 [ACCEPTED 07/16/99] Data section
Bug#38902: [PROPOSED] data section
Changed bug title.
> --
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
>>"Joey" == Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joey>If the upstream changelog file is HTML formatted, it may be
Joey>made available as /usr/doc//changelog.html.gz'. A plain
Joey>text version of the changelog must be accessible as
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> retitle 40706 [AMENDMENT 17/7/99] /usr/share/doc vs. /usr/doc transition
Bug#40706: /usr/share/doc vs. /usr/doc
Changed bug title.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Ian Jackson
(administrator, Debian bugs da
Hi,
>>"Darren" == Darren O Benham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Darren> So what's the next step? Nobody appears to be objecting to
Darren> this idea... All comments have been favorable...
Well, this seems like we have a consensus decision here. The
proposer or the seconds of this propo
retitle 40706 [AMENDMENT 17/7/99] /usr/share/doc vs. /usr/doc transition
thanks
PROPOSAL: Easing the transition from `/usr/doc' to `/usr/share/doc'
---
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi,
>>"Joseph" == Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Contact address for virtual package name list (#26159)
>> * Old.
>> * Proposed by Adam di Carlo.
>> * Contact name in virtual-packages-list should be debian-policy, not
>> Christian Schwarz.
>> ( This *must* be implemented, possi
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 02:35:04PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> Policy still suggests /etc/rc.boot instead of /etc/rcS.d (#32448)
> * Stalled for 1 week.
> * Proposed on 26 Jan 1999 by Brian Servis; seconded by Julian Gilbey
> and Joey Hess.
> * Change policy to refer to /etc/rcS.d instead o
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 12:35:46PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Debian bug report logs - #37251
> [AMENDMENT 1999/05/06] Software depending on non-US
> Debian bug report logs - #37262
> [AMENDMENT 1999/05/06] Software d
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 02:09:36PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> I think Manoj has a point. How about:
>
>If the upstream changelog file is HTML formatted, it may be
>made available as /usr/doc//changelog.html.gz'. A plain
>text version of the changelog must be accessible as
>/usr/doc/
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 12:44:51PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> Edward Betts wrote:
> > On debian-policy, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Ok, I accept the amendment into my proposal. The new proposed text:
> > >
> > > If the upstream changelog file is HTML formatted, it must be accessibl
Sound good to me. That was one of the reasons I asked if anybody had
objections last week(ly summary).
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 03:27:13PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> Darren O. Benham wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 02:35:04PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> > > Data section (#38902)
> > > * Stalled
25 matches
Mail list logo
