Re: New maintainer intending to package pavuk
On Wed, Jun 17, 1998 at 08:12:05PM -0400, Shaleh wrote: > Policy is not set in stone. There are times when it makes little ^^ But please discuss any violations you intend to commit in debian-policy. I think a policy that is not set in stone is not useful. Ian Jackson proposed recently, IIRC, that if any package is not policy-compliant it is either a bug in the package, or a bug in policy, and it should be filed appropriately. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Debian packages at ftp://ftp.rising.com.au/pub/hamish. PGP#EFA6B9D5 CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome. http://hamish.home.ml.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: New maintainer intending to package pavuk
> Policy is not set in stone. There are times when it makes little > sense. I say make a console version, then make a X package. The X > version can have a gtk and/or Xlib version. Are you also going to help > him maintain the upstream source now that he is away? I thought about > this back in March, but I rarley if ever use the app. > Well I use this type of app all the time so I figured hey why not. Plus it seemed a simple enough program to do for my first package. But alas i'm not a programer if anyone wants to help maintain it and wants to kick me off as maintainer I wouldn't mind a bit. Justin Burket -- ===--- I prefer to think of the Noble Eightfold Path not as steps to the Unconditioned but more as a brick road towards the Unconditioned, take away one brick and you stumble, but keep all in place and you reach your goal ----- Type Bits/KeyIDDate User ID pub 1024/F8423289 1998/06/17 Justin Burket <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- Version: 2.6.3a mQCNAzWIP6wAAAEEAL/m+Cj/Z8O5t3YQ/E2vBHjXYHkTkkUjregZHKFsJ8R4FK0I FfmRGqlw8lTgfV5S11GiA8soAjkgotIwYbLPWsA0vqXGPl/3sYwBOo2+Wg+rIbcj KTmjk1hHfXGZTO9Zk6YZPAXtp1ZRqpccyy+k2cX92nxweOudZnmwBaP4QjKJAAUR tCZKdXN0aW4gQnVya2V0IDx6b3J0b25AdGhlcGVudGFnb24uY29tPokAlQMFEDWI P6x5sAWj+EIyiQEBEoID/RLpOZNvsYlkrqnuwhnIg9vPaUGf3lk1O2tK/CSqffgl i363Beso5q6ziJ9qto0MLBXiFDy5OBaEWDcxJ+D+z4+5u+zln4k4ZhwfqNqMuyVk Dro4wzVAdOZKfS6LlLBlG709DvG8XOUyHS6jESBEhlaHFXuxS5dxLcpeH+4WMI5y =OqsM -END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: New maintainer intending to package pavuk
Policy is not set in stone. There are times when it makes little sense. I say make a console version, then make a X package. The X version can have a gtk and/or Xlib version. Are you also going to help him maintain the upstream source now that he is away? I thought about this back in March, but I rarley if ever use the app. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
