Hello,
On Fri 24 May 2019 at 04:01PM +02, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 14/05/19 at 14:30 -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> I think there's a fairly clear consensus emerging that it's worth having
>> things to check when making a build system conversion. Looking at
>> debdiff, ditherscope and
Hi,
On 14/05/19 at 14:30 -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> I think there's a fairly clear consensus emerging that it's worth having
> things to check when making a build system conversion. Looking at
> debdiff, ditherscope and reproducibility of the build all appear to be
> important things to
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 03:22:16PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 02:09:14PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 15.05.2019, 11:31 +0200 schrieb Enrico Zini:
Or introduce a lintian check for not using dh. Then the maintainer
could override lintian and document
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 11:31:46AM +0200, Enrico Zini wrote:
>...
> - if a package has had an inactive and unresponsive maintainer for a
>long time, it would indeed be a case for salvaging.
>
>I could however imagine someone having enough energy to dust off old
>packages in the
Hi,
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 02:09:14PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, den 15.05.2019, 11:31 +0200 schrieb Enrico Zini:
> > I'd propose to recommend dh as the default build system, and document
> > in README.source if there are reasons to use something else.
> >
> > At that point,
Enrico Zini writes ("Re: NMUs: Do we want to Require or Recommend DH"):
> I'd propose to recommend dh as the default build system, and document in
> README.source if there are reasons to use something else.
>
> At that point, one could look at README.source to see if changin
Am Mittwoch, den 15.05.2019, 11:31 +0200 schrieb Enrico Zini:
> I'd propose to recommend dh as the default build system, and document
> in README.source if there are reasons to use something else.
>
> At that point, one could look at README.source to see if changing
> build system would be an
Quoting Enrico Zini (2019-05-15 11:31:46)
> On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 02:30:52PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
> > How do we feel about people making build system conversions when
> > those conversion make it easier to fix some other bug that they are
> > fixing as part of an NMU?
> > That is,
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 02:30:52PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> How do we feel about people making build system conversions when those
> conversion make it easier to fix some other bug that they are fixing as
> part of an NMU?
> That is, imagine that a package is mishandling the combination of
>
Quoting Scott Kitterman (2019-05-15 04:47:48)
>
>
> On May 15, 2019 1:13:52 AM UTC, Paul Wise wrote:
> >On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 2:31 AM Sam Hartman wrote:
> >
> >> How do we feel about people making build system conversions when
> >> those conversion make it easier to fix some other bug that
On May 15, 2019 1:13:52 AM UTC, Paul Wise wrote:
>On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 2:31 AM Sam Hartman wrote:
>
>> How do we feel about people making build system conversions when
>those
>> conversion make it easier to fix some other bug that they are fixing
>as
>> part of an NMU?
>
>If the maintainer
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 2:31 AM Sam Hartman wrote:
> How do we feel about people making build system conversions when those
> conversion make it easier to fix some other bug that they are fixing as
> part of an NMU?
If the maintainer is MIA enough to not express an opinion when asked
if adding a
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 02:30:52PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
>...
> How do we feel about people making build system conversions when those
> conversion make it easier to fix some other bug that they are fixing as
> part of an NMU?
What happens if the maintainer dislikes the change?
The
Hi Sam,
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 02:30:52PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> So, I think there is an emerging consensus against the idea of people
> NMUing a package simply to convert it to dh.
>
> First, I'd like to explicitly call for any last comments from people who would
> like to see us permit
I think there's a fairly clear consensus emerging that it's worth having
things to check when making a build system conversion. Looking at
debdiff, ditherscope and reproducibility of the build all appear to be
important things to consider in such a case.
So, I think there is an emerging
15 matches
Mail list logo
