On Aug 31 2015, Sam Hartman wrote:
> OK.
> I'd really appreciate hearing from anyone now who needs more time before
> a CFV.
Please don't forget that if anyone needs more time, they can always vote
FD.
Best,
-Nikolaus
--
GPG encrypted emails preferred. Key id:
Sam Hartman writes:
> I ask you to retain the following two paragraphs that explain why we
> prefer option D should we adopt this:
>The Technical Committee has reviewed the underlying technical
>issues around this question and has resolved that Debian will be
>
> "Keith" == Keith Packard writes:
Keith> Do you think the reworded version is easier to understand in
Keith> the context of the overall process? That was my major concern
Keith> here.
I think a bit.
My big question is whether you think we'd still be able to
Sam Hartman writes:
> I think a bit.
> My big question is whether you think we'd still be able to call for a
> vote tomorrow if we make this change.
I think the change has real benefit beyond simple clarification by
immediately adopting Charles' changes to policy without
OK.
I'd really appreciate hearing from anyone now who needs more time before
a CFV.
Sam Hartman writes:
> OK.
> I'd really appreciate hearing from anyone now who needs more time before
> a CFV.
I'd also love to hear back from Charles about the updated D proposal,
and whether that helps him understand what it means.
--
-keith
signature.asc
Description:
Le Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 01:57:21PM -0700, Keith Packard a écrit :
> Sam Hartman writes:
>
> > OK.
> > I'd really appreciate hearing from anyone now who needs more time before
> > a CFV.
>
> I'd also love to hear back from Charles about the updated D proposal,
> and whether
Le dimanche, 30 août 2015, 22.01:27 Keith Packard a écrit :
> Thinking about this tonight, I've rewritten option D as AB + patch.
>
> As you can see, this makes packages shipping menu and .desktop files
> for the same application buggy, makes all packages using the Debian
> Menu System buggy, and
Le Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 10:01:27PM -0700, Keith Packard a écrit :
>
> Thinking about this tonight, I've rewritten option D as AB + patch.
> OPTION D':
>
> Using its power under §6.1.1 to decide on any matter of technical
> policy, and its power under §6.1.5 to offer advice:
>
>1. The
> "Keith" == Keith Packard writes:
Keith> Thinking about this tonight, I've rewritten option D as AB +
Keith> patch.
Keith> As you can see, this makes packages shipping menu and
Keith> .desktop files for the same application buggy, makes all
Keith>
On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 20:00:55 -0700 Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 09:13:33AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
If we adopt Keith's proposal without updating policy 9.6--we retainIs
the SHOULD have menu entries for all command line apps, but move the
metadata format
Steve == Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
Steve On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 09:13:33AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
If we adopt Keith's proposal without updating policy 9.6--we
retainIs the SHOULD have menu entries for all command line apps,
but move the metadata format to
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
741573_menu_systems/keithp_draft.txt includes further guidance regarding the
technical details of how to map between the menu system and .desktop files.
Since this is not on the ballot itself, how do we intend to surface this so
that it can be useful
Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org writes:
Thanks. I would appreciate if it would be acknowledged, I am a bit academic
by
training...
The proposed ballot tries to clarify the difference between D and AB by
noting:
6. The policy change by Charles Plessy in ba679bff76[1]
would comply
On Friday 28 August 2015 19:58:02 Matthew Vernon wrote:
That's not much comfort to folk like me who use the trad menu (I'm an
FVWM user) - you're proposing getting rid of something that currently
works, and leaving nothing to replace it with.
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Xdg-menu
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 05:18:06PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
* Overall, this would make it possible, therefore, to maintain the
menu information primarily in the more sophisticated .desktop
format, so that source packages with .desktop files would not need
to contain trad menu
Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes (Bug#741573: Proposed draft of ballot to resolve
menu/desktop question):
Right. But the 'trad Debian menu' (as outlined in Policy §9.6) has never
reached the point where applications that need not be passed any
special command line arguments for normal operation
Sam Hartman writes (Re: Bug#741573: Proposed draft of ballot to resolve
menu/desktop question):
Ian, I'd like to encourage you to use less loaded words than
destroy.
I can see why you are objecting but I'm afraid I cannot see these
proposals any other way. Perhaps as you suggest it would
Ian == Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
Hi.
I'd appreciate it if you would look at the restatement at the bottom and
help me make sure I'm understanding the technical implications of the
proposal we're considering.
I think I may be following what Ian's saying.
Ian I
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Maybe some people need to get rid of that mentality where other people
have to do more work to comply with their twisted view of reality.
Calling someone else's viewpoint twisted is needlessly inflammatory and
not acceptable when discussing bugs
I realise that it was perhaps a tactical error to send both
(a) a message with impassioned rhetoric and (b) a message containing
constructive proposal.
Let me repost the proposal with some extra commentary:
Ian Jackson writes:
I had an interesting and helpful conversation with a member of the
Le vendredi, 28 août 2015, 13.51:52 Ian Jackson a écrit :
Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes:
Keith's proposal doesn't imply that the trad menu would be
destroyed (your words),
It does. There is nothing in Keith's proposal which preserves the
existing trad menu metadata. According to `apt-file
On Friday 28 August 2015 16:06:45 Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
[snip]
I think apparmor is a fine example: the maintainers of apparmor do
maintain the apparmor-profiles package which collects apparmor profiles
for packages that don't ship them (or that ship outdated or broken
ones). This gives
Hi.
Your recent post to Ian is inappropriate and not consistent with the
rules of conduct we've established for our communication.
Multiple members of our community have talked to you about this issue.
Please stop.
owner@bugs and listmaster copied, although I will not request any
specific
On Friday 28 August 2015 13:27:54 you wrote:
On Friday 28 August 2015 16:06:45 Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
[snip]
I think apparmor is a fine example: the maintainers of apparmor do
maintain the apparmor-profiles package which collects apparmor profiles
for packages that don't ship them
On Thursday 27 August 2015 18:11:56 Ian Jackson wrote:
So the real dispute is: should the existing application metadata
database (currently represented by the Debian trad menu files in
existing packages):
(a) continue to be maintained in its existing file format
(b) be translated to a
On 28/08/15 19:22, Sune Vuorela wrote:
On Thursday 27 August 2015 18:11:56 Ian Jackson wrote:
(c) be destroyed.
Given that there are people who want to maintain it, I think (c) is
unacceptable.[1]
Unfortunately, the people who wants to maintain it are not the same people who
has to carry
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
* Overall, this would make it possible, therefore, to maintain the
menu information primarily in the more sophisticated .desktop
format, so that source packages with .desktop files would not need
to contain trad menu files too.
Responding mostly to Keith's draft from debian-ctte.git.
The Whereas leaves out a very important aspect of this. It is not
sufficient to simply decide on the file format. The primary dispute
here is not really about file formats.
The trad Debian menu is primarily curated collection of
I had an interesting and helpful conversation with a member of the KDE
team at Debconf. They made an interesting proposal:
* We have machinery that can produce trad menu files from desktop
files.
* It is possible to have extension information in extra fields in a
.desktop file. This
Le jeudi, 27 août 2015, 18.11:56 Ian Jackson a écrit :
The trad Debian menu, and the XDG menu files as found in existing
desktop applications, do not agree on either
(i) the scope of the menu
Right. But the 'trad Debian menu' (as outlined in Policy §9.6) has never
reached the point where
Don == Don Armstrong d...@debian.org writes:
While we're not overturning anything in the sense of an override
here, I think we owe an explanation for our actions, and I feel
really strongly about that.
Don Ideally the patch and its rationale should stand alone without
Don
On Wednesday 19 August 2015 10:57:43 Sam Hartman wrote:
Don == Don Armstrong d...@debian.org writes:
While we're not overturning anything in the sense of an override
here, I think we owe an explanation for our actions, and I feel
really strongly about that.
Don Ideally
Le mardi, 18 août 2015, 14.01:27 Don Armstrong a écrit :
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015, Sam Hartman wrote:
Don == Don Armstrong d...@debian.org writes:
Don On Sun, 16 Aug 2015, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
What about just adding Keith's proposal to the ballot, and
let
the
Le Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 06:14:45PM +0200, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud a écrit :
Hi Charles, and thanks for your feedback,
Thanks as well for your prompt answer :) Here are a few point-to-point
comments. Altogether, I would happily support option D if it were further
amended.
the last sentence of
Don == Don Armstrong d...@debian.org writes:
Don On Sun, 16 Aug 2015, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
What about just adding Keith's proposal to the ballot, and let
the Condorcet magic act?
Don This has sort of been my plan; I just have not had enough spare
Don cycles in the
Hi Charles, and thanks for your feedback,
Le lundi, 17 août 2015, 21.25:59 Charles Plessy a écrit :
I think that option D has two fundamental flaws and I would like to
recommend the TC against voting for it.
* First, if it is voted, nothing will happen.
If the TC adopts option D, and if
Le Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 05:54:50PM +0200, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud a écrit :
3. We recommend that the maintainers of the 'menu' package update
that package to reflect this increased focus on .desktop files
by modifying the 'menu' package to use .desktop files for the
source
Le mercredi, 29 juillet 2015, 10.29:10 Don Armstrong a écrit :
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015, Sam Hartman wrote:
Unless someone objects
I propose that the following text also be included in option b:
Using its power under §6.1.5 to offer advice:
1. The Technical Committee suggests that the
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
What about just adding Keith's proposal to the ballot, and let the
Condorcet magic act?
This has sort of been my plan; I just have not had enough spare cycles
in the past few weeks (grant deadlines) to have the time necessary to
work through
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015, Sam Hartman wrote:
Unless someone objects
I propose that the following text also be included in option b:
Using its power under §6.1.5 to offer advice:
1. The Technical Committee suggests that the maintainers of the
Debian menu package support translating
Unless someone objects
I propose that the following text also be included in option b:
Using its power under §6.1.5 to offer advice:
1. The Technical Committee suggests that the maintainers of the
Debian menu package support translating .desktop files of
packages which do not
I'm proposing the following draft ballot to resolve the menu/desktop
question. This draft is available in git; feel free to make specific
changes there and announce them to the bug. If there is no discussion or
substantial changes to this draft, I will call for votes around Monday
the 3rd of
43 matches
Mail list logo