Don Armstrong writes (Bug#688772: gnome Depends network-manager-gnome):
1) we decide that failures of NM to detect basic ifupdown
configurations and avoid overriding them are bugs, possibly of RC
severity
2) given the gnome maintainer's desire to have NM installed by default
from the gnome
Don Armstrong writes (Bug#688772: gnome Depends network-manager-gnome):
On Fri, 05 Oct 2012, Ian Jackson wrote:
Is there anyone who is unhappy with the draft below ?
I personally don't support 8, 9 and 10.
Losing 9 and 10 is fine by me if that gets your vote.
[I'd do something like 8,
On 12 October 2012 07:31, Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:
Don Armstrong writes (Bug#688772: gnome Depends network-manager-gnome):
1) we decide that failures of NM to detect basic ifupdown
configurations and avoid overriding them are bugs, possibly of RC
severity
2) given
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012, Ian Jackson wrote:
Don Armstrong writes (Bug#688772: gnome Depends network-manager-gnome):
1) we decide that failures of NM to detect basic ifupdown
configurations and avoid overriding them are bugs, possibly of RC
severity
2) given the gnome maintainer's desire to
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012, Ian Jackson wrote:
Don Armstrong writes (Bug#688772: gnome Depends network-manager-gnome):
1) we decide that failures of NM to detect basic ifupdown
configurations and avoid overriding them are bugs, possibly of RC
severity
2) given the gnome maintainer's desire to
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012, Sam Hartman wrote:
I'm still confused why recommends doesn't work for everyone.
I understand that the Gnome maintainers want N-M installed by default.
Except I think recommends gets you that.
That's what I'm confused about too, but I'm assuming that there is
indeed a
Don Armstrong writes (Bug#688772: gnome Depends network-manager-gnome):
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012, Sam Hartman wrote:
I understand that the Gnome maintainers want N-M installed by default.
Except I think recommends gets you that.
That's what I'm confused about too, but I'm assuming that there is
Ian Jackson writes (Re: Bug#688772: gnome Depends network-manager-gnome):
Don Armstrong writes (Bug#688772: gnome Depends network-manager-gnome):
That's what I'm confused about too, but I'm assuming that there is
indeed a reason why Recommends isn't enough, and the gnome meta
package has to
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 07:51:44PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
It seems to me that the gnome maintainers have a philosophical view
that Network Manager is very strongly part of GNOME, and that they
feel that this philosophical position can only be properly reflected
by a hard dependency. That
Stefano Zacchiroli writes (Bug#688772: gnome Depends network-manager-gnome):
To be fair, it seems to me that Joss has provided an additional answer
to the why recommends? question in
https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2012/09/msg00089.html
For lack of a better synopsis, the argument
Le vendredi 12 octobre 2012 à 19:51 +0100, Ian Jackson a écrit :
The simpler hypothesis is that there is no reason.
I should expand on that, because it makes it sound like I think the
gnome maintainerss' behaviour is entirely inexplicable.
Don’t worry, it just sounds like yourself.
--
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le vendredi 12 octobre 2012 à 19:51 +0100, Ian Jackson a écrit :
The simpler hypothesis is that there is no reason.
I should expand on that, because it makes it sound like I think the
gnome maintainerss' behaviour is entirely inexplicable.
Le vendredi 12 octobre 2012 à 21:07 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
For lack of a better synopsis, the argument there is because recommends
do not behave properly across upgrades.
And also, the purpose of metapackages is to ship dependencies.
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`. `'
Le vendredi 12 octobre 2012 à 13:06 -0700, Don Armstrong a écrit :
Continuing to attack Ian like this is not helpful. Please stop.
No, you please stop.
You should be glad there is one remaining GNOME maintainer willing to
talk about the crusade. Seeing Ian talk his usual crap is a good way to
14 matches
Mail list logo
