On September 22, 2011 05:54:02 PM Adam Borowski wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 05:14:32PM -0500, Matt Zagrabelny wrote:
Hi Bruce,
I hope Debian would honour the Social Contract and put the needs of
the users ahead of software freeness concerns in that case.
Do we have a name
* Bruce Sass bms...@shaw.ca [2011-09-21 23:18:54 CEST]:
On September 20, 2011 02:24:33 PM Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 01:12:37PM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
tl;dr - what do you think, is a Depends: foo-contrib | foo acceptable
for packages in main or should it be
On September 22, 2011 02:50:25 AM Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
* Bruce Sass bms...@shaw.ca [2011-09-21 23:18:54 CEST]:
On September 20, 2011 02:24:33 PM Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 01:12:37PM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
tl;dr - what do you think, is a Depends:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 08:19:32AM -0600, Bruce Sass wrote:
So *every* time a package outside of main is an installation candidate
the decision should be made, not once, very much indeed.
As someone who doesn't care about licences
Since this effectively translates to not caring about the
On 11-09-22 at 08:19am, Bruce Sass wrote:
On September 22, 2011 02:50:25 AM Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
* Bruce Sass bms...@shaw.ca [2011-09-21 23:18:54 CEST]:
Debian already favours Main packages by default
Not if the alternative dependency chain has a non-free package
first. I know what
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 01:12:37PM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
Hi!
Policy is clear on packages in main aren't allowed to depend on
packages outside of main. Now in a fair amount of cases this has been
worked around by having the package outside of main as alternative
dependency
On September 22, 2011 12:06:11 PM Steve Langasek wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 08:19:32AM -0600, Bruce Sass wrote:
So *every* time a package outside of main is an installation candidate
the decision should be made, not once, very much indeed.
As someone who doesn't care about
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:25:06PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
I know that the buildd system likes to pull in the first package in
such an alternative dependency chain. And now I start to wonder:
Is it allowed for a package in main to have a package _outside_ of main
as first
On September 22, 2011 12:23:00 PM Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
On 11-09-22 at 08:19am, Bruce Sass wrote:
On September 22, 2011 02:50:25 AM Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
* Bruce Sass bms...@shaw.ca [2011-09-21 23:18:54 CEST]:
Debian already favours Main packages by default
Not if the
Hi Bruce,
I hope Debian would honour the Social Contract and put the needs of the
users ahead of software freeness concerns in that case.
Do we have a name for the DFSG equivalent of Godwin's Law? Because you
just failed it.
Well, that's disappointing... called a Nazi for daring to
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 05:14:32PM -0500, Matt Zagrabelny wrote:
Hi Bruce,
I hope Debian would honour the Social Contract and put the needs of the
users ahead of software freeness concerns in that case.
Do we have a name for the DFSG equivalent of Godwin's Law? Because you
just
On 20/09/11 06:24 PM, Paul Wise wrote:
In my intended case I believe they always end up with foo from main,
only if they choose foo-contrib will they get it, which is how I think
it should be. main should not reference packages from contrib/non-free
in any way.
If that's how it works, then
On September 20, 2011 02:24:33 PM Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 01:12:37PM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
tl;dr - what do you think, is a Depends: foo-contrib | foo acceptable
for packages in main or should it be Depends: foo | foo-contrib
instead?
I think the first
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Bruce Sass wrote:
Would once be fine, or should contrib/non-free users need to make an explicit
choice every first time a package outside of Main is an installation
candidate?
s/first// but yes.
As a user of contrib/non-free I specifically only want packages
Hi!
Policy is clear on packages in main aren't allowed to depend on
packages outside of main. Now in a fair amount of cases this has been
worked around by having the package outside of main as alternative
dependency and a package in main offer basic functionality for the
package to
Dear Gerfried,
Gerfried Fuchs schrieb am 20.09.2011 13:12:
Policy is clear on packages in main aren't allowed to depend on
packages outside of main. Now in a fair amount of cases this has been
worked around by having the package outside of main as alternative
dependency and a package in main
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
tl;dr - what do you think, is a Depends: foo-contrib | foo acceptable
for packages in main or should it be Depends: foo | foo-contrib
instead?
I vote:
Package: bar
Depends: foo
Package: foo-contrib
Provides: foo
--
bye,
pabs
On 09/20/2011 08:43 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
Package: bar
Depends: foo
Package: foo-contrib
Provides: foo
While that neatly sidesteps the issue, 7.5 says:
To specify which of a set of real packages should be the default to
On 09/20/2011 01:12 PM, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
Hi!
Hi
Policy is clear on packages in main aren't allowed to depend on
packages outside of main. Now in a fair amount of cases this has been
worked around by having the package outside of main as alternative
dependency and a package in
On 11-09-20 at 07:41pm, Luk Claes wrote:
On 09/20/2011 01:12 PM, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
Hi!
Hi
Policy is clear on packages in main aren't allowed to depend on
packages outside of main. Now in a fair amount of cases this has
been worked around by having the package outside
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 07:41:11PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
On 09/20/2011 01:12 PM, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
Policy is clear on packages in main aren't allowed to depend on
packages outside of main. Now in a fair amount of cases this has been
worked around by having the package outside of
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 01:12:37PM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
tl;dr - what do you think, is a Depends: foo-contrib | foo acceptable
for packages in main or should it be Depends: foo | foo-contrib
instead?
I think the first form above (foo-contrib | foo) is not acceptable. My
argument is
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 8:04 PM, Ben Armstrong wrote:
While that neatly sidesteps the issue, 7.5 says:
To specify which of a set of real packages should be the default to
satisfy a particular dependency on a virtual package, list the real
package as an alternative before the
23 matches
Mail list logo
