Bug#850156: Please firmly deprecate vendor-specific series files [and 1 more messages]

Ian Jackson writes: > Russ Allbery writes: >> Very belatedly, thank you, this makes a lot of sense. I hadn't thought >> about the angle of the most likely vendor to be used in a >> vendor-specific series file deciding whether they want this feature to >> be used at all. When you point that

Bug#850156: Please firmly deprecate vendor-specific series files [and 1 more messages]

Russ Allbery writes ("Bug#850156: Please firmly deprecate vendor-specific series files [and 1 more messages]"): > Very belatedly, thank you, this makes a lot of sense. I hadn't thought > about the angle of the most likely vendor to be used in a vendor-specific > series fi

Bug#850156: Please firmly deprecate vendor-specific series files [and 1 more messages]

Guillem Jover writes: > But for the Ubuntu case, which is what I was explicitly discussing with > Steve, the reality is slightly different. The Ubuntu organization is > reigned by their own rules, and it's a different entity to Debian, and > how they reach their conclusions and policies is for

Bug#850156: Please firmly deprecate vendor-specific series files [and 1 more messages]

Hi! [ Had this sitting here half drafted, but as I got poked privately also due to the apparent incoherence in the first part, I'm sending the reply for that now. And will handle the other part later on. Although, I guess, because it might be only partly on topic, I'm considering

Bug#850156: Please firmly deprecate vendor-specific series files [and 1 more messages]

Guillem Jover writes: > If someone wants to see dpkg changed in some way related to this, I'd > request the same thing I did to Ian a couple of years ago, gather input > from derivatives and other current users, on their reasons for using it, > or start a discussion with them on whether they'd

Bug#850156: Please firmly deprecate vendor-specific series files [and 1 more messages]

On Tue, 2018-07-31 at 17:23:31 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 02:12:13AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > I'm detaching dpkg from this, I don't see anything constructive to do > > out if this, TBH. > > > If someone wants to see dpkg changed in some way related to this, I'd

Bug#850156: Please firmly deprecate vendor-specific series files [and 1 more messages]

On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 02:12:13AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > I'm definitely not even going to consider removal of extraction support, > > because that would break at least historic source unpacking. That's > > the price of adding these kinds of features into dpkg. > > When it comes to

Processed: Re: Bug#850156: Please firmly deprecate vendor-specific series files [and 1 more messages]

Processing control commands: > reassign -1 debian-policy 3.9.8.0 Bug #850156 [dpkg-dev, debian-policy] Please firmly deprecate vendor-specific series files Bug reassigned from package 'dpkg-dev, debian-policy' to 'debian-policy'. Ignoring request to alter found versions of bug #850156 to the

Bug#850156: Please firmly deprecate vendor-specific series files [and 1 more messages]

Control: reassign -1 debian-policy 3.9.8.0 On Mon, 2018-07-30 at 06:15:42 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > In any case, I discussed this in a private mail interchange with Ian > a couple of years ago (AFAIR). My reply back then was that I don't > personally feel very strongly about the feature, that

Bug#850156: Please firmly deprecate vendor-specific series files [and 1 more messages]

On Wed, 2018-04-18 at 09:15:25 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18 2018, Ian Jackson wrote: > > FAOD I feel very strongly about this. The bug is over a year old. > > Can the Policy Editors please tell me when it would be apprropiate to > > escalate this to the TC ? *Sigh* > Sorry, I

Bug#850156: Please firmly deprecate vendor-specific series files [and 1 more messages]

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 09:11:11PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > There isn't even a guarantee that what gets synced to Ubuntu has ever > been unpacked - or *can* be unpacked - with dpkg-source. Indeed. Not only is there no guarantee, but it goes wrong in practice too. As an operator of

Bug#850156: Please firmly deprecate vendor-specific series files [and 1 more messages]

On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 at 21:11:11 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > The examples given are for series.ubuntu, which is certainly the case I've > seen in the wild. Ubuntu, as a project, did not ask for this. As an Ubuntu > developer, it has never benefitted me. I have only ever seen it used by >

Bug#850156: Please firmly deprecate vendor-specific series files [and 1 more messages]

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 09:15:25AM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: > Hello, > > On Wed, Apr 18 2018, Ian Jackson wrote: > > > FAOD I feel very strongly about this. The bug is over a year old. > > Can the Policy Editors please tell me when it would be apprropiate to > > escalate this to the TC ? >

Bug#850156: Please firmly deprecate vendor-specific series files [and 1 more messages]

Hello, On Wed, Apr 18 2018, Ian Jackson wrote: > FAOD I feel very strongly about this. The bug is over a year old. > Can the Policy Editors please tell me when it would be apprropiate to > escalate this to the TC ? Sorry, I wrote my other e-mail before reading this. ISTM that we can move

Bug#850156: Please firmly deprecate vendor-specific series files [and 1 more messages]

Simon McVittie writes ("Bug#850156: Please firmly deprecate vendor-specific series files"): > On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 at 14:36:14 +0200, Mike Gabriel wrote: > > On Wed, 4 Jan 2017 13:41:53 + Ian Jackson > > wrote: > > > But [vendor.series] is quite wrong, because