Control: tag -1 wishlist
Control: tag -1 + wontfix
Hi,
Paul Wise wrote on 11. Sep. 2021:
> I think that the privacy breaches that lintian complains about
> represent several sets of bugs that all need fixing:
I strongly agree with pabs and his (no more copied) explanations and
reasoning. These
Control: severity -1 normal
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 6:21 AM Daniel Leidert wrote:
>
> I would doubt our FTP masters if they accept packages with
> lintian errors
Actually, they do! The FTP Masters publish the list of tags they do
not accept. [1] The privacy tags are not on it. Lintian
I think that the privacy breaches that lintian complains about
represent several sets of bugs that all need fixing:
The browsers shipping in Debian place no barriers between local files
on disk, sites on the local network and sites on the Internet. So if
someone reads some local documentation
Am Freitag, dem 10.09.2021 um 15:46 +0200 schrieb Bill Allombert:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 02:41:20PM +0200, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> > And once again: What is the sense and what right do we have to remove
> > donation
> > requests just because they use icons of paypal/patreon/github/whatever
> >
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 02:41:20PM +0200, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> And once again: What is the sense and what right do we have to remove donation
> requests just because they use icons of paypal/patreon/github/whatever which
> we
> cannot distribute?
If upstream cannot be bothered to provide a
Am Freitag, dem 10.09.2021 um 15:10 +0200 schrieb Bill Allombert:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 02:41:20PM +0200, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> > Am Freitag, dem 10.09.2021 um 13:56 +0200 schrieb Bill Allombert:
[..]
> > > Lintian errors do not by themselves create more work to package
> > > maintainers
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 02:41:20PM +0200, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> I'm not sure why this x-post over a dozen addresses, but if you wish so...
>
> Am Freitag, dem 10.09.2021 um 13:56 +0200 schrieb Bill Allombert:
> > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 04:05:32AM -0700, Felix Lechner wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
>
Same here, no idea why this x-post over so mayn addresses...
Am Freitag, dem 10.09.2021 um 04:05 -0700 schrieb Felix Lechner:
>
> > The severity chosen for these tags/checks is not justified by any of our
> > policies, neither the Debian policy, not the best packaging practises nor
> > any legal
I'm not sure why this x-post over a dozen addresses, but if you wish so...
Am Freitag, dem 10.09.2021 um 13:56 +0200 schrieb Bill Allombert:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 04:05:32AM -0700, Felix Lechner wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > The severity chosen for these tags/checks is not justified by any of our
Le ven. 10 sept. 2021 à 11:06, Felix Lechner
a écrit :
>
> Hi,
>
> > The severity chosen for these tags/checks is not justified by any of our
> > policies, neither the Debian policy, not the best packaging practises nor
> > any legal reason!
> >
> > There is no technical nor social justification
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 04:05:32AM -0700, Felix Lechner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > The severity chosen for these tags/checks is not justified by any of our
> > policies, neither the Debian policy, not the best packaging practises nor
> > any legal reason!
> >
> > There is no technical nor social
Hi,
> The severity chosen for these tags/checks is not justified by any of our
> policies, neither the Debian policy, not the best packaging practises nor
> any legal reason!
>
> There is no technical nor social justification for this severity.
>
> making our package compliant to this new
12 matches
Mail list logo
