On Fri, 2002-04-12 at 19:42, Brian May wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 01:47:05AM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> > I like dput's DWIM features. For example, it figures out automatically
> > whether or not a package is in non-US, and uploads to the correct
> > place.
>
> This may not be as much
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 01:47:05AM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> I like dput's DWIM features. For example, it figures out automatically
> whether or not a package is in non-US, and uploads to the correct
> place.
This may not be as much use now non-us is being moved to main...
How does it dete
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 01:47:05AM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Thu, 2002-04-11 at 20:53, Brian May wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:40:47AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > > I am happy to take it. But a question: with the more actively
> > > maintained dput now being quite mature, do we
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 01:47:05AM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> > > I am happy to take it. But a question: with the more actively
> > > maintained dput now being quite mature, do we still need both dupload
> > > and dput?
> >
> > Dumb question, but what dput, and why is one better then the other
On Thu, 2002-04-11 at 20:53, Brian May wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:40:47AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > I am happy to take it. But a question: with the more actively
> > maintained dput now being quite mature, do we still need both dupload
> > and dput?
>
> Dumb question, but what dput
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:40:47AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> I am happy to take it. But a question: with the more actively
> maintained dput now being quite mature, do we still need both dupload
> and dput?
Dumb question, but what dput, and why is one better then the other?
(please leave lang
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:29:04AM +, Wilmer van der Gaast <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> Julian [EMAIL PROTECTED]@Tue, 9 Apr 2002 09:40:47 +0100:
> > I am happy to take it. But a question: with the more actively
> > maintained dput now being quite mature, do we still need both dup
"Tille, Andreas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The same for bug/reportbug.
> Or you could just write an E-Mail to BTS or write your
> own super duper bug reporting tool.
Yes you could, like debian-bug.el
;-)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe".
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 03:14:34PM +0200, J?r?me Marant wrote:
> > An excellent point. We *should* be more aggressive about dumping things
> > no one wants to maintain. So why did you attack someone who raised a
> > question about one particular package? The question was answered, move
>
> You g
>
> [1] Unless someone actually tries to embed arbitrary pthon in it.
dput's config is not python code. It is parsed by ConfigParser which is
essentially ini style.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Colin Watson wrote:
> The implementation language really does make a difference in the case of
> dupload and dput, since it affects their configuration languages.
There exist perl modules to parse files more or less identical to dput's
configuration file[1]. Heck, it should take about 5 lines of c
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:29:55PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > > I am happy to take it.
> >
> > Several people already stepped in (which, IMHO, replies to the "Do we
> > need dupload?" question). See the bug report. Josip Rodin was the
> > first one, even before I formally orphaned it.
>
> F
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:43:20PM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:40:47AM +0100,
> Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> a message of 24 lines which said:
>
> > I am happy to take it.
>
> Several people already stepped in (which, IMHO, replies to the "Do we
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:46:48AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > Internal examination. How about talking about those tons of orphaned
> > packages that noone uses rather that discussing about whether we have
> > to keep one out of two small tools which have both many users?
>
> An excelle
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:57:45PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> Stop this aggressive rant. Please read the thread and come back if you
> want to really discuss this a serious way.
Aggressive rant? You're the one who accused someone of somehow deciding
what people could work on.
> Internal
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 07:35:00AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:14:55PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> > Developers decide what they want to do with their time. Period.
> > You are not in a position to decide what you want them to work on.
>
> (Yawns) Once again, th
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, [iso-8859-1] Jérôme Marant wrote:
> Stop talking about one's time. I won't repeat myself.
The discussion started because someone stated that he has not enough
time. Moreover I talked about a second aspect: Confusing users.
I'll now save my time and stop posting to this thre
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:28:14AM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:14:55PM +0200, J?r?me Marant wrote:
> > > It would be better for users if we would say: "Just use reportbug
> > > of you want to report a bug." Now we have to say you could use
> > > reportbug or bug - just
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:40:47AM +0100,
Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
a message of 24 lines which said:
> I am happy to take it.
Several people already stepped in (which, IMHO, replies to the "Do we
need dupload?" question). See the bug report. Josip Rodin was the
first one, even
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:14:55PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> Developers decide what they want to do with their time. Period.
> You are not in a position to decide what you want them to work on.
(Yawns) Once again, the defensive fury when someone asks a question.
Please, could you tell me
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:14:55PM +0200, J?r?me Marant wrote:
> > It would be better for users if we would say: "Just use reportbug
> > of you want to report a bug." Now we have to say you could use
> > reportbug or bug - just try it out and waste your time with this
> > trial. Or you could just
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 12:13:14PM +0200, Tille, Andreas wrote:
> > Same thing for simple tools.
> I can't see any real reason in which way two tools to upload Debian
> packages make Debian better. Please give an explanation for such
> stubborn and stupid people like me. In my eyes it would be
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 12:13:14PM +0200, Tille, Andreas wrote:
[..snip..]
> The same for bug/reportbug. Reportbug is much more developed and
> takes the user at his hand and lead through the report much more
> sophisticated than bug.
>
> It would be better for users if we would say: "Just use r
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Colin Watson wrote:
> > IMHO two tools with the same functionality are
> > 1. confusing for users
> > 2. waste of time for developers. They should spend their time
> > to make one better tool instead of two good tools.
>
> The implementation language really does make a
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, [iso-8859-1] Jérôme Marant wrote:
> Welcome to the Free Software world.
Hmm, I've thought I would just be here. :)
> There are plenty of editors, MUA, MTA and so on because people
> want to have fun doing something (and often learning from this
> experience), even if i
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:29:04AM +, Wilmer van der Gaast wrote:
> > I am happy to take it. But a question: with the more actively
> > maintained dput now being quite mature, do we still need both dupload
> > and dput?
> >
> *Ugh* Why are those nifty Perl scripts going to be replaced by
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 11:29:02AM +0200, Tille, Andreas wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > I am happy to take it. But a question: with the more actively
> > maintained dput now being quite mature, do we still need both dupload
> > and dput?
>
> IMHO two tools with the same fun
Julian [EMAIL PROTECTED]@Tue, 9 Apr 2002 09:40:47 +0100:
> I am happy to take it. But a question: with the more actively
> maintained dput now being quite mature, do we still need both dupload
> and dput?
>
*Ugh* Why are those nifty Perl scripts going to be replaced by Python
stuff?
(Don't t
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 11:29:02AM +0200, Tille, Andreas wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Julian Gilbey wrote:
>
> > I am happy to take it. But a question: with the more actively
> > maintained dput now being quite mature, do we still need both dupload
> > and dput?
> IMHO two tools with the same fun
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> I am happy to take it. But a question: with the more actively
> maintained dput now being quite mature, do we still need both dupload
> and dput?
IMHO two tools with the same functionality are
1. confusing for users
2. waste of time for developers. T
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 10:26:25PM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Version: N/A; reported 2002-04-08
> Severity: normal
>
> Sorry, folks, but it is clear I have not enough time to work seriously
> on a package like dupload, which is important and should be handled
> with care.
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2002-04-08
Severity: normal
Sorry, folks, but it is clear I have not enough time to work seriously
on a package like dupload, which is important and should be handled
with care.
I leave it to someone more active.
There are many bugs reported but most are mino
32 matches
Mail list logo
