Enrique Zanardi wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 11, 1998 at 03:50:25AM +1000, Martin Mitchell wrote:
> > * Developer controlled automatic archive maintenance (eg removal of packages
> > automatically after GPG signed email with list of packages to delete)
>
> That is a very interesting goal. Have you asked
On Sat, Jul 11, 1998 at 03:50:25AM +1000, Martin Mitchell wrote:
> Yann Dirson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * GPG as standard signature for packages
> * Bugs mentioned in changelog closed automatically upon package installation
> * Developer controlled automatic archive maintenance (eg removal of
On Fri, 10 Jul 1998, Yann Dirson wrote:
> Hm, does anyone knows what is VISUAL exactly intendend for ? I'm
> thinking of some setting like `EDITOR=ed' and `VISUAL=vi'. If it's
> really what was meant for a use of VISUAL, I'd say it's not needed any
> more ...
Checking man pages and doc files f
On Jul 10, Martin Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>* GPG as standard signature for packages
I don't know if it will be ready. Every new release I still find new
bugs (and I haven't started using it for everiday things).
>* Autocompilation support
What do we still have to do to support that?
"Jules Bean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> * Developer controlled automatic archive maintenance (eg removal of
> >> packages automatically after GPG signed email with list of
> >> packages to delete)
> >
> > I think this idea, as presented here, is very bad. Even with sanity
> > checks an
The Gecko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Are the even partially possible or are these desirable goals not to be
> attempted?
My impression from recent conversations was that we were leaning in
the direction of not having our goals coupled to releases anymore. We
would have goals that we were work
--On Fri, Jul 10, 1998 10:13 pm +0200 "James Troup" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Martin Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> That's all that comes to mind right now, any other suggestions?
>
> That we release slink before 2038 or so? These goals (the desirable
> ones, that is) aren't viab
On 10-Jul-98 James Troup wrote:
> That we release slink before 2038 or so? These goals (the desirable
> ones, that is) aren't viable if we want slink to not be the disaster
> hamm is.
Are the even partially possible or are these desirable goals not to be
attempted?
---
Shaleh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Not to speak for him but, I take this to mean auto creation of debs
> from a central repository. An idea that has been kicked around for
> a while. With new machines coming RSN we should be able to have one
> for every arch supported.
Well don't worry, while
> > * Autocompilation support
>
> Eh? That sounds suspiciously like meaningless buzz-word talk. What's
> ``autocompilation support'' please?
Not to speak for him but, I take this to mean auto creation of debs from
a central repository. An idea that has been kicked around for a while.
With new
Martin Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Developer controlled automatic archive maintenance (eg removal of
> packages automatically after GPG signed email with list of
> packages to delete)
I think this idea, as presented here, is very bad. Even with sanity
checks and more thought, I'
Guy this is not a slam to you or any of the people who help you.
That said, one of the biggest problems I see facing Debian today and in
the future is that our list of packages grows daily. A ftp maintainer
or group of them is a needed thing, but I also feel that either the
developers need to hav
> That is a very interesting goal. Have you asked Guy Maor about how doable
> is it? Some tasks will have to be done by-hand, as currently (installing
> new packages, or any package that goes to frozen or stable), but a lot of
> bugs filed against ftp.debian.org would be closed faster if we could
>
On Sat, Jul 11, 1998 at 03:50:25AM +1000, Martin Mitchell wrote:
> * Developer controlled automatic archive maintenance (eg removal of packages
> automatically after GPG signed email with list of packages to delete)
That is a very interesting goal. Have you asked Guy Maor about how doable
is it?
Yann Dirson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Maybe some will think it's not yet time to discuss this, but I think
> we need a central repository for ideas of what the release goals for
> slink will be.
>
> The following list is only built from what I remember to have read at
> some point, so it will
Previously Yann Dirson wrote:
> Hm, does anyone knows what is VISUAL exactly intendend for ? I'm
> thinking of some setting like `EDITOR=ed' and `VISUAL=vi'. If it's
> really what was meant for a use of VISUAL, I'd say it's not needed any
> more ...
It's for when you actually have a good termina
Steve Greenland writes:
> Unix(tm) programs that need to launch editor often check for
> two environment variables: VISUAL and EDITOR. The algorithm is
> typically
>
> if (VISUAL is set)
> use $VISUAL
> else if (EDITOR is set)
> use $EDITOR
> els
Maybe some will think it's not yet time to discuss this, but I think
we need a central repository for ideas of what the release goals for
slink will be.
The following list is only built from what I remember to have read at
some point, so it will need surely some additions. I also add some
items
18 matches
Mail list logo
