On 7 May 2014 13:41, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
I guess I understand my confusion now:
In the debate last 2 months, there were some pretty strong arguments
advanced why keeping the minified files was breaking the social
contract (and thus RC-worthy)
I looks like now that it is not
2014-05-06 7:58 GMT+02:00 Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org:
Le mardi 06 mai 2014 à 02:57 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :
Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-05 23:35:34)
2014-05-05 21:31 GMT+02:00 Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk:
Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-05 20:57:39)
Or do we really want to
Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-07 09:08:11)
2014-05-06 7:58 GMT+02:00 Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org:
Le mardi 06 mai 2014 à 02:57 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :
Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-05 23:35:34)
2014-05-05 21:31 GMT+02:00 Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk:
Quoting Emilien Klein
Hi Daniel,
2014-05-05 0:32 GMT+02:00 Daniel Kahn Gillmor d...@fifthhorseman.net:
On 05/04/2014 05:31 PM, Emilien Klein wrote:
No other comments from the team on Jérémy's proposal?
If the upstream tarball has both the original and minified javascript, I
don't think we need to actively re-pack
Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-05 10:09:19)
2014-05-05 0:32 GMT+02:00 Daniel Kahn Gillmor d...@fifthhorseman.net:
On 05/04/2014 05:31 PM, Emilien Klein wrote:
No other comments from the team on Jérémy's proposal?
If the upstream tarball has both the original and minified javascript, I
Hi Jonas,
2014-05-05 11:07 GMT+02:00 Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk:
Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-05 10:09:19)
2014-05-05 0:32 GMT+02:00 Daniel Kahn Gillmor d...@fifthhorseman.net:
On 05/04/2014 05:31 PM, Emilien Klein wrote:
No other comments from the team on Jérémy's proposal?
If
Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-05 12:16:25)
2014-05-05 11:07 GMT+02:00 Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk:
[skipping parts on who said what: lacks consensus]
I see no need for this team to have a policy more strict than Debian
generally regarding tarball repackaging.
It's not about being more
On 05/05/2014 06:16 AM, Emilien Klein wrote:
It's not about being more strict.
It's about explicitly mentioning a requirement that is not clear to a
number of our co-packagers.
FWIW, if the exclusions in debian/copyright (those mentioned on the
wiki) interact properly with uscan, and if the
2014-05-05 18:59 GMT+02:00 Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk:
Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-05 12:16:25)
2014-05-05 11:07 GMT+02:00 Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk:
[skipping parts on who said what: lacks consensus]
I see no need for this team to have a policy more strict than Debian
generally
Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-05 20:57:39)
2014-05-05 18:59 GMT+02:00 Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk:
Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-05 12:16:25)
2014-05-05 11:07 GMT+02:00 Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk:
[skipping parts on who said what: lacks consensus]
I see no need for this team to
2014-05-05 21:31 GMT+02:00 Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk:
Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-05 20:57:39)
2014-05-05 18:59 GMT+02:00 Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk:
Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-05 12:16:25)
2014-05-05 11:07 GMT+02:00 Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk:
[skipping parts on who said
Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-05 23:35:34)
2014-05-05 21:31 GMT+02:00 Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk:
Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-05 20:57:39)
Or do we really want to have this debate started again for each new
package asking the team to be reviewed?
I believe we need not have same
Le mardi 06 mai 2014 à 02:57 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :
Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-05 23:35:34)
2014-05-05 21:31 GMT+02:00 Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk:
Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-05 20:57:39)
Or do we really want to have this debate started again for each new
package
No other comments from the team on Jérémy's proposal?
+Emilien
2014-04-25 23:49 GMT+02:00 Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org:
Le vendredi 25 avril 2014 à 23:34 +0200, Emilien Klein a écrit :
2014-04-24 18:34 GMT+02:00 Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org:
The conclusion coming out of these dicussions
Le 5 mai 2014 00:13, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk a écrit :
Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-04 23:31:51)
No other comments from the team on Jérémy's proposal?
Evidently ;-)
Who can upload that to our policy page, so that we can point new team
members to it instead of starting the debate
On 05/04/2014 05:31 PM, Emilien Klein wrote:
No other comments from the team on Jérémy's proposal?
If the upstream tarball has both the original and minified javascript, I
don't think we need to actively re-pack the upstream tarball to get rid
of the minified javascript, any more than we need to
Le lundi 05 mai 2014 à 00:28 +0200, Emilien Klein a écrit :
Le 5 mai 2014 00:13, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk a écrit :
Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-04 23:31:51)
No other comments from the team on Jérémy's proposal?
Evidently ;-)
Who can upload that to our policy page, so that
2014-04-24 18:34 GMT+02:00 Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org:
The conclusion coming out of these dicussions could also go in
developers reference or best packaging practices ?
Makes sense.
Please fix this (badly formulated) proposal:
Strict application of DFSG requires files generated from
Le vendredi 25 avril 2014 à 23:34 +0200, Emilien Klein a écrit :
2014-04-24 18:34 GMT+02:00 Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org:
The conclusion coming out of these dicussions could also go in
developers reference or best packaging practices ?
Makes sense.
Please fix this (badly formulated)
Hi David and team,
2014-04-23 23:17 GMT+02:00 David Prévot da...@tilapin.org:
Hi,
- Regarding your latest commit 719083c do not install should.min.js -
agreed with debian-js team: this is a long discussion, the short
version is that you should repackage the upstream tarball to remove
the
20 matches
Mail list logo
