Re: About canonical Vcs fields

On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 1:56 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote: > Thanks for bringing up this subject. > > I use svn.d.o everywhere, I don't like the new ones. However, the thing I > don't like much more is inconsistency: some packages use svn.d.o, some > anonscm.d.o, and some mixture of the two... Ugh. I don'

Re: About canonical Vcs fields

* Dmitry Shachnev , 2013-03-23, 15:51: I use svn.d.o everywhere, I don't like the new ones. However, the thing I don't like much more is inconsistency: some packages use svn.d.o, some anonscm.d.o, and some mixture of the two... Ugh. I don't mind switching if we switch everything at once. I'm ha

Re: About canonical Vcs fields

On 23 March 2013 12:37, Jakub Wilk wrote: > * Dmitry Shachnev , 2013-03-23, 15:51: > >>> I use svn.d.o everywhere, I don't like the new ones. However, the thing I >>> don't like much more is inconsistency: some packages use svn.d.o, some >>> anonscm.d.o, and some mixture of the two... Ugh. I don't

Re: About canonical Vcs fields

* Dmitrijs Ledkovs , 2013-03-23, 13:01: Okay. Unless I hear objections, I'll do mass-commit to switch to anonscm.d.o in ~2 weeks. Can you do such commit simply after wheezy is out the door? I don't mind if we release in two weeks. ;P -- Jakub Wilk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-r