Steve Langasek wrote:
4) the package itself is not the right name
4) is an approximation, but not actually a correct description (it's the
same incorrect approximation used by Policy itself). The problem is that
the package name is not being changed when the library soname changes, which
means tha
On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 01:40:14PM -0700, Jeff Carr wrote:
> Robert McQueen wrote:
> >Tamas SZERB wrote:
> >>once upon a time, I closed this bug. then the submitter reopened it,
> >>so currently I don't give it a f*ck. Our opinion are different, so if
> >>you feel any ambition to get the both side
Robert McQueen wrote:
Tamas SZERB wrote:
once upon a time, I closed this bug. then the submitter reopened it,
so currently I don't give it a f*ck. Our opinion are different, so if
you feel any ambition to get the both sides together, feel free to
volunteer. :)
This package's violation of Debian po
Tamas SZERB wrote:
> once upon a time, I closed this bug. then the submitter reopened it,
> so currently I don't give it a f*ck. Our opinion are different, so if
> you feel any ambition to get the both sides together, feel free to
> volunteer. :)
This package's violation of Debian policy on the pa
4 matches
Mail list logo
