Re: [DEP 8] About the Restrictions and Features field.

2012-06-25 Thread Ian Jackson
Charles Plessy writes ([DEP 8] About the Restrictions and Features field.): reading DEP 8's appendix, I wonder about the necessity to keep separate Restrictions and Features fields. For instance, the no-build-needed Feature could also be a needs-build restriction. Perhaps the specification

Re: [DEP 8] About the Restrictions and Features field.

2012-06-25 Thread Jakub Wilk
* Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org, 2012-06-23, 12:33: reading DEP 8's appendix, I wonder about the necessity to keep separate Restrictions and Features fields. For instance, the no-build-needed Feature could also be a needs-build restriction. I noticed this only today: | autopkgtest (2.0.0)

Re: [DEP 8] About the Restrictions and Features field.

2012-06-25 Thread Stefano Zacchiroli
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 03:15:56PM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote: | autopkgtest (2.0.0) unstable; urgency=medium | | * Incompatible test declaration spec changes: | - no-build-needed is now the default; build-needed is a Restriction |that tests which need it have to declare.

Re: [DEP 8] About the Restrictions and Features field.

2012-06-25 Thread Ian Jackson
Stefano Zacchiroli writes (Re: [DEP 8] About the Restrictions and Features field.): On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 03:15:56PM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote: Apparently http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep8/ is not being kept up-to-date. :| Indeed, sorry about that. I tried to merge the changes ~30 mins ago

Re: [DEP 8] About the Restrictions and Features field.

2012-06-25 Thread Ian Jackson
Ian Jackson writes (Re: [DEP 8] About the Restrictions and Features field.): Stefano Zacchiroli writes (Re: [DEP 8] About the Restrictions and Features field.): Indeed, sorry about that. I tried to merge the changes ~30 mins ago, but I first need to put my hands on the current Git HEAD

Re: [DEP 8] About the Restrictions and Features field.

2012-06-25 Thread Stefano Zacchiroli
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 02:57:25PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: But I still think this would be a good idea: Perhaps it would be better to have the wiki page point to a suitable gitweb page ? This one perhaps:

[DEP 8] About the Restrictions and Features field.

2012-06-22 Thread Charles Plessy
Dear Ian, Iustin and Stefano, reading DEP 8's appendix, I wonder about the necessity to keep separate Restrictions and Features fields. For instance, the no-build-needed Feature could also be a needs-build restriction. Perhaps the specification can be simplified by dropping the Features field ?