control: severity -1 wishlist
thanks
Hi Bill,
On Sat, Apr 27, 2024 at 12:11:21PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> 4.9.2. The dak ls utility
> could mention rmadison from devscripts
> that does not require to log to ftp-master.debian.org.
yes. patches, commits & pushes welcome.
--
cheers,
On Sat, Apr 20, 2024 at 08:30:52PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> While I fully support properly marking obsolete packages by putting
> them in the (unfortunately misnamed :) oldlibs section (well excluding
> library-like depended on packages that get dropped as a mater of course).
> I wanted to
Hi Vincent,
On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 04:24:16AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Now that the deborphan package has been removed from unstable,
> the section "Make transition packages deborphan compliant" in
> "Best Packaging Practices" is out of date and should be updated.
>
> See
On Sun, Apr 14, 2024 at 08:43:51PM +0800, Sean Whitton wrote:
> ... but if dev-ref is already shipping both, maybe singlepage is indeed
> usable these days ...
I think it is.
> > Could the Policy Editors team check, if everything is fine now, and if
> > this should be published again?
> > At
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 09:18:06AM +0200, Thomas Lange wrote:
> A single page html may be an additional option but there's already the
> single page txt version and the PDF. That's sufficient and I see no
> need in providing more formats of this manual.
>
> Therefore we can close this and I will
On Fri, Apr 05, 2024 at 09:49:58PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> If we go that route, here is a proposed alternative patch:
>
> --- a/policy/ch-source.rst
> +++ b/policy/ch-source.rst
> @@ -338,7 +338,8 @@
> For example, the build target should pass ``--disable-silent-rules``
> to any
On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 10:58:37PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Thanks Philipp. Following that result, please find a patch proposal:
>
> --- a/policy/ch-source.rst
> +++ b/policy/ch-source.rst
> @@ -338,9 +338,9 @@
> For example, the build target should pass ``--disable-silent-rules``
> to
On Mon, Feb 05, 2024 at 11:00:42AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> > I think for English at least I'd prefer to offer both A4 and letter, for eg
> > the German translation I think it's enough to only provide A4.
> Looks like that info can be gotten from the locales on glibc systems:
[...]
nice, thanks.
hi & thanks for filing this bug report!
On Sun, Feb 04, 2024 at 10:57:03AM +0100, Sebastian Geiger (Lanoxx) wrote:
> May I request, that:
>
> a) We switch to A4 as the default format for the developers-reference
> since that is the format used by most of the world.
> b) We consider offering both
control: reopen -1
control: reassign -1 debian-policy
control: retitle -1 please stop mentioning urgency=critical
thanks
On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 10:27:20PM +0100, Daniel Gröber wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 07:24:49PM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > I believe Debian policy should b
On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 07:04:01PM +0100, Daniel Gröber wrote:
> That's fine, but in that case this fact should be documented instead no?
> Right now there's confusion across the docs what criticality levels are
> available. Britney.conf and d-policy mention critical/emergency but nothing
> else
hi,
snapshot.d.o also uses sha1 sums, at least internally, but I'd not
surprised if also for external verification.
--
cheers,
Holger
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C
⠈⠳⣄
Reporter:
Hi Holger,
On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 10:49:20PM +0200, Holger Wansing wrote:
> yesterday I was a bit shocked when reading chapter 8 of the developers-ref:
> https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/l10n.en.html
>
> That chapter has several wrong/bad sentences (or is heavily
control: retitle -1 check_running_kernel fails to find version on
bookworm/(arm64|armhf)
thanks
hi,
I can confirm this bug affects armhf as well:
holger@jtx1a:~$ /usr/lib/nagios/plugins/check_running_kernel
WARNING: Running kernel does not match on-disk kernel image: [Linux version
package: developers-reference
x-debbugs-cc: debian-secur...@lists.debian.org
hi,
On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 10:46:20PM +0200, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> > I found the Securing Debian Manual
> > (https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/securing-debian-manual/index.en.html).
> > This version is from 2017.
On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 11:19:06PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 09:21:00PM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 09:29:04AM -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > > >>>>> "Kristian" == Kristian Penno writes:
>
On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 09:29:04AM -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > "Kristian" == Kristian Penno writes:
> Kristian> source package is referenced. The lyx source package uses
> Kristian> some shell commands to move files around in the rules
> Kristian> file. Is this preferred to
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 11:04:07PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> ---
> policy/ap-pkg-alternatives.rst | 3 +++
> policy/ap-pkg-diversions.rst | 3 +++
> policy/ch-binary.rst | 35 ++
> 3 files changed, 41 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git
On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 08:19:08AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I would like to add more documentation like this around systemd-related
> things to Policy because systemd is complicated and has a lot of options,
> so people who aren't deeply familiar with it will easily miss best
> practices in
hi,
someone on irc wondered about icons and Debian packages so I noticed
https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/menu-policy/
prominently linked from https://www.debian.org/doc/devel-manuals#policy
But then I though the menu system has been deprecated as eg noted in
#975631:
On Tue, Nov
On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 10:25:21AM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Why don't we just fix all those packacges, instead of changing any
> documents? Is there anyone who actually wants to introduce new packages
> not using git? I'm not so sure.
mostly agreed, i'm just sure there will be very few
On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 01:59:21PM +, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> I've created a PR for devref -
> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/developers-reference/-/merge_requests/41
fwiw, merged into developers-reference 12.16 in sid.
--
cheers,
Holger
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁
On Sun, Feb 12, 2023 at 06:56:28AM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Yes, info version is included and it contains appendix, too.
> So closing this bug is right action.
thanks for confirming!
> Thanks for your effort.
:) thanks.
--
cheers,
Holger
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁
hi,
actually I found the info version now, but it seems complete to me:
$ sudo apt install info
$ info developers-reference
# voila. /usr/share/info/developers-reference.info.gz is where the file is.
So I'm still inclined to close this bug.
--
cheers,
Holger
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁
control: tags -1 +moreinfo
thanks
hi,
(originally sent to the wrong (but archived) bug number...)
we're not shipping the manual in .info format, so I'm wondering whether this
bug should simply be closed, or why not?
--
cheers,
Holger
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁
hi,
some updates on this bug:
- the issue seems to have nothing to do with the single page html format,
it's also present in the multi page html version, and the cause seems
to be https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/issues/6614
- the issue is visible annoying in the generated package
On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 06:39:08PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Note that the TC declining to rule on an issue does not override the policy
> group right to make
> a determination on that issue. So we are back to the situation before the
> referral to the TC.
do you think #801065 should be
On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 06:13:32PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > not only based on that, but way more importantly that this would change
> > *years* of existing practice.
> Could you clarify which 'existing practices' ?
how Debian packages behaved in the last decades.
--
cheers,
retitle -1 turn #904558 into advice - how postinst should deal with failures
thanks
On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 09:26:58AM -0700, Sam Hartman wrote:
> The TC bug is 904558.
thank you very much for this pointer, that's a pretty good discussion,
which resulted in
-
So,
hi,
btw, as pointed out on irc: I ment consensus, not consent. :)
On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 10:36:02AM -0500, Marvin Renich wrote:
> > I don't think there has been consent on the issue, thus I'm tagging it
> > moreinfo.
> >
> > I'm also wondering whether to mark this bug as wontfix (until there
On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 08:39:36AM -0700, Sam Hartman wrote:
> >>>>> "Holger" == Holger Levsen writes:
> Holger> I don't think there has been consent on the issue, thus I'm
> Holger> tagging it moreinfo.
> My reading of the TC and debian-de
control: tags -1 +moreinfo
control: affects -1 debtags
thanks
hi,
https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/20221019132043.d4c4liyt6s6qe...@enricozini.org
and
https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/bb7064071ebd838a9e045a1916bba49a9b960d80.ca...@debian.org
indicate that debtags.debian.org might be
hi,
annex.debconf.org is gone, the slides are at
https://salsa.debian.org/debconf-team/public/share/debconf16/-/raw/master/slides/13-we-need-you-to-release-debian.pdf
--
cheers,
Holger
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP:
control: tags -1 +moreinfo
thanks
hi,
I don't think there has been consent on the issue, thus I'm tagging it
moreinfo.
I'm also wondering whether to mark this bug as wontfix (until there is
consent) or to reassign to debian-policy or simply to close it.
--
cheers,
Holger
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
hi,
the bug got closed, but not in vain:
commit 61a395888206b5ef45beb3d47d5ae81471f85c78
Author: Holger Levsen
Date: Mon Feb 6 20:11:22 2023 +0100
tools: add a pointer to https://wiki.debian.org/debian/watch
when watch files are mentioned. Thanks to #660193
Signed-off
On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 11:28:41AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> diff --git a/policy/ch-archive.rst b/policy/ch-archive.rst
> index ab04261..15b9343 100644
> --- a/policy/ch-archive.rst
> +++ b/policy/ch-archive.rst
> @@ -24,11 +24,11 @@ The aims of this are:
>
> The *main* archive area forms the
On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 01:25:10PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Thanks Holger for pointing this out. I'll cut a release today or
> tomorrow.
\o/ & thank you!
--
cheers,
Holger
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP:
hi,
do you plan to release a new version of debian-policy before the freeze
in January?
I'm wondering whether I should start polishing uploads now or better
wait.
--
cheers,
Holger
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP:
hi Simon,
On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 03:49:13PM +, Simon McVittie wrote:
> I've had the attached sitting in my outbox for a while and I think it's at
> least a good start towards what Marc requests?
yes, thanks a lot!
> I have deliberately not documented the precise meaning of needing to
>
On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 10:15:07AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Experimental is different because it is an incomplete distribution,
> which needs to default to using packages from unstable except if
> build-depends explicitly lists versions that are only available in
> experimental.
[...]
On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 04:17:04PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Sep 2022 at 19:11:38 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > I also reworded the paragraph about backports to hopefully address
> > Holger's reading. It's just trying to say that backports uses aptitude in
> > the normal way and
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 07:17:17PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> +The autobuilders for the Debian backports suite do not perform this
> +transformation and instead use the full alternatives list to resolve
> +dependencies.
this sounds like they install all build depends, incl alternative ones?!
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 06:39:11PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Here is proposed wording that I think is ready for seconds.
>
> From: Russ Allbery
> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2022 18:35:55 -0700
> Subject: [PATCH] Clarify udeb-only source packages are out of scope
>
> Note that source packages that
On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 09:29:36PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I'm fine with this change, but as Sam points out, the deeper point here is
> that Policy doesn't apply to udebs. This is the whole point of udebs.
When you say it like this, it sounds to strong to me, if it were written in
-policy.
control: tags -1 wishlist
thanks
On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 10:44:26AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> for a few years now, the Debian archive wants to see source-only
> uploads. This is not documented in the Developer's Reference and also
> now in the New Maintainer's Guide. It should be there.
I agree
On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 07:43:45PM +0700, Teukumif tahulziran wrote:
> > There is already a section about reproducibility in the debian-policy,
> > but it only mentions the binary packages. It might be a good idea to
> > add a new requirement that repeatedly building the source package in
> > the
On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 07:16:59PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> > Even if that consensus does not exist, there is probably consensus
> > that native packages are a poor match for large packages (because of
> > the inefficiency of making small updates to the packaging of native
> > packages),
>
On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 02:21:20PM +0100, kaliko wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 16:26:33 +0000 Holger Levsen
> wrote:
> > […]
> > and then for bullseye we should use distro-info(-data). (wondering how
> > to do this sensibly at run time and not at build time...)
> What is
On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 01:21:24PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> > unpredictable or non-deterministic allocation of such ids is a cause of non-
> > reproducibiliy for Debian images and installations, so us reproducible folks
> > would like to see "sensible" to be expanded to take reproducible builds
Hi Marc,
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 08:15:37PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> This is my patch.
I like your patch. :) I just have one comment:
> +``Dynamic local`` allocated ids should by default be arranged in some
> +sensible order, but the behavior should be configurable.
unpredictable or
control: tags -1 + pending
thanks
Hi Philippe,
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 11:01:29PM +0100, Philippe SWARTVAGHER wrote:
> (first bug report and patch to Debian here ! :) )
whhooo, congrats! And thank you very much!
> I attach a patch fixing some minor formatting issues in the French
>
On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 06:47:21PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 11:18:35AM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> > If I get no pushbacks I'll also propose some text later on when I'm
> > freer (unless somebody beats me to it!).
>
> I'm hereby seeking seconds (or, well,
On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 03:11:55PM +0100, Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues
wrote:
> > This footnote might not be the best place to document the precise behaviour
> > of autobuilders (which currently is outside the scope of policy). On the
> > other hand, having a fully specified build process
hi,
(leaving full context for debian-policy@l.d.o)
On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 06:56:24AM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> Package: dpkg-dev
> Version: 1.20.9
>
> Dear dpkg-dev developers,
>
> One feature that is deeply missed, and which disappered when we moved to
> source only uploads, is the
On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 10:51:44AM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> Here are some updated patches for Policy, incorporating this requirement.
thanks for your work on this, Simon.
> I have not attempted to incorporate the corner case involving
> build-profiles. I think if we were going to do that,
Hi Marco,
On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 09:48:50PM -0500, Marco Villegas wrote:
> It seems like the mentioned link[1] is not working anymore, and looking
> around a bit it seems to be at [2] now instead.
agreed.
> I was thinking about the right place to add the link to.
> Even if there are some
On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 04:56:25PM -0400, Boyuan Yang wrote:
> According to
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2021/06/msg2.html ,
> Debian's presence on Freenode has ceased. However,
> https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/resources.html#irc-channels
> still
On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 10:26:47AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I'll therefore propose that we move the discussion of whether to give
> stronger advice on when to use native packages to a separate bug. Once
> this is merged, there will be some text in Policy defining native
> packages, so it will
Hi Russ,
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 06:17:59PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Here is an updated diff that documents the most well-understood version
> conventions in the Debian archive. More could certainly be added; this is
> just a first start that addresses this specific bug.
thank you for this,
On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 02:03:59PM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
> My rationale is that debian/copyright is a summary, it's not the license
> text in the files.
> I absolutely agree we shouldn't go change people's actual copyright
> notices in the files.
that. and what Bill said.
> As a copyright
y only
the last year as that might be used to calculate when a project becomes
public domain after the dead of an author.
So if I have contributed to something in 2018 and 2020 I find it ok to claim
'Copyright 2018-2020 Holger Levsen'. (Also because I might not have commited
something in 2019 but yo
On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 04:02:54AM -0800, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> While a consistent time was returned, depending on the timezone
> the package was built in can cause the date to vary:
> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
> -DATE := $(shell date -d '@$(TIMESTAMP)' +'%Y-%m-%d')
> +DATE
On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 12:12:18PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 07, 2020 at 01:01:28PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> > diff --git a/policy/ch-controlfields.rst b/policy/ch-controlfields.rst
> > index 0d7a3e9..a21a510 100644
> > --- a/policy/ch-controlfields.rst
> > +++
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 07:07:50PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> It's my understanding, that there is no clear consensus what should
> happen on package purge. Some packages do manually remove system users
> and go to some length to find files/directories owned by a system
> user/group and remove
hi,
I'm not fully sure if people really intend to change the 1.0 format, but if so,
I'm against it. If you do it, please call it 1.1 or whatever, but please don't
change 1.0, too many tools rely on it's decade old behavior.
Besides that it's also my opinion that we should get rid off native
On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 03:46:05PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > I'd appreciate a quick review and possible corrections from you!
> Fine for me.
:) thanks!
--
cheers,
Holger
---
) 2015 - 2020 Hideki Yamane
+ (c) 2019 - 2020 Holger Levsen
This manual is free software; you may redistribute it and/or modify it
under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the
diff --git a/source/index.rst b/source/index.rst
index a3d04b9..08922c1 100644
control: tags -1 + pending
thanks
On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 05:46:06AM +0700, Judit Foglszinger wrote:
> Added a patch for clarifying removability from upload queue.
thank you very much! merged to master and updated .po files. (I vaguely plan an
upload before the end of the month.)
> Subject:
On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 06:33:29PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > In section 5.6.1, it is mentioned that the dcut command can be used to
> > remove packages from the upload queue.
> > However, section 5.9.2.1 states that it is no longer possible to remove
> > packages from incoming.
> > This
Hi Moritz,
On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 08:32:58AM +0200, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> The current version in unstable (11.0.10) again reads:
> | If it's an upstream problem, you have to forward it to the upstream author.
> | Forwarding a bug is not enough, you have to check at each release if the
> |
Hi Daniel,
On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 06:14:02PM +, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> The documentation of the "Closes: #NN" changelog syntax describes
> the syntax in terms of a Perl regular expression. However, not all
> readers know Perl. I suggest to describe the semantics in English,
> in
Hi Simon, everyone:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 11:32:00AM +, Simon McVittie wrote:
> To be completely clear about this for those using this bug report as a
> stand-in for the requested documentation in devref (like me), it's now at:
> https://auth.buildd.debian.org/auth/giveback.cgi?pkg===
I'd
Hi,
thanks for your feedback, I've now rewritten the paragraph in question
to simply read:
If you need to check for the existence of a command, you should use
something like
::
if command -v install-docs > /dev/null; then ...
You can use this function to search ``$PATH`` for a command
On Sun, Nov 17, 2019 at 10:10:11AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Changes:
>
> * Add "prohibited" to the terms for requirements
> * Add another tier (Policy advice) using encouraged and discouraged
> * Stop confusing may and optional with wishlist bugs
> * Add terms for the collective set of Policy
hi Sean,
On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 03:54:05PM +0800, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Section 6.4 should perhaps recommend `command -v` not `which`, because
> Debian Policy 4.1.5.0 allows maintainer scripts to assume SUSv4, which
> requires support for `command -v`.
three comments:
a.) 'should perhaps' is
On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 11:20:59AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > I think there is already a lintian warning:
> >
> > https://lintian.debian.org/tags/missing-systemd-service-for-init.d-script.html
> Oh! I should have checked rather than assuming. It would ideally be nice
> to make it a
On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 09:10:42PM +0100, Ansgar wrote:
> Sure, changes@db.d.o still works and is the only way to configure some
> settings. It is documented here: https://db.debian.org/doc-mail.html
aaah! I even use that regulary via a script in ~/bin here :)
So I guess for
control: tags +1 moreinfo
On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 11:27:46PM +, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Source: developers-reference
> Please mention email gate
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/1999/12/msg00627.html
does that even still work today? and if so, how?
--
cheers,
Holger
On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 12:13:00PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > From d5895ca185fa1d678a098697d9e1c601c84f45dd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Stephen Kitt
> > Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2019 21:09:52 +0200
> > Subject: [PATCH] Allow strong dependencies on X font packages
>
> > The X server shipped in
package: developers-reference
severity: wishlist
- Forwarded message from "Adam D. Barratt" -
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 05:59:08 +0100
From: "Adam D. Barratt"
To: debian-devel-annou...@lists.debian.org
Subject: debian.org mail handling updates
Message-ID:
On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 08:30:03PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > thanks for that information! do you agree there's nothing to be added to
> > dev-ref?
> Yeah, looks like it.
& thanks for confirming this too! :)
--
cheers,
Holger
Hi Guillem,
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 12:30:50PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > I don't really understand "#288822: developers-reference: "Bugs" control
> > field
> > not documented" and I'm not sure it's really an issue still.
> This would be the Bugs field documented now in both deb-control(5)
Package: debian-policy
Version: 4.4.1.1
Severity: normal
Dear Maintainer,
the current package description contains this paragraph:
It also replaces the old Packaging Manual; most of the still-relevant
content is now included as appendices to the Policy Manual.
I'm around a long time and I
Hi Marc,
On Fri, Nov 17, 2006 at 09:41:48AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> The information collected in
> http://wiki.debian.org/AccountHandlingInMaintainerScripts should
> eventually be put into the developer's reference, chapter 6.5.
would you suggest to remove all of that from this wiki page and
On Sat, Oct 05, 2019 at 12:12:55PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > the comments are outdated, all these three bugs have been fixed in the
> > meantime...
> Does that mean the singlehtml version can be restored ?
> Does this apply to debian-policy too ?
I've no idea, I just noticed these bugs are
On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 09:07:41PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> fwiw, src:developers-reference/Makefile now contains these lines:
>
> # singlehtml files
> # don't install Sphinx singlehtml output until various bugs
> # are fixed upstream (e.g. #873456, #
block 658825 by 873456
block 658825 by 876075
block 658825 by 879048
thanks
hi,
fwiw, src:developers-reference/Makefile now contains these lines:
# singlehtml files
# don't install Sphinx singlehtml output until various bugs
# are fixed upstream (e.g. #873456, #876075,
On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 10:40:09AM +0200, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> I only read the title of the d-d-a mail, but I read the upgrade
> checklist many times over the course of the years.
almost the same here, just that I usually read the mail too.
--
cheers,
Holger
control: retitle -1 developers-reference: please mention the packaging-tutorial
and lintian-brush packages
thanks
--
cheers,
Holger
---
holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
package: developers-reference
severity: wislist
hi,
subject says it all, please mention packaging-tutorial somewhere.
--
cheers,
Holger
---
holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 12:46:19AM +0700, Judit Foglszinger wrote:
> Updated both descriptions.
merged, thank you both.
--
cheers,
Holger
---
holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 05:24:34PM +0700, Judit Foglszinger wrote:
> Added patch for updating retirement/return description to new process.
thank you & happily merged!
--
cheers,
Holger
---
On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 11:57:43PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > >> I haven't checked how many packages do not fulfill this condition
> > > please do check. last (and only) time we (=r-b) looked, it wasn't
> > > practical at all. this was around 5 years ago, but I don't remember any
> > > work
On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 01:34:49PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> There is already a section about reproducibility in the debian-policy,
> but it only mentions the binary packages. It might be a good idea to
> add a new requirement that repeatedly building the source package in
> the same
On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 11:51:32PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> I saw you uploaded a new version. Thanks.
most changes were from you, so thank you very much too!
> As I see this package, remaining tasks are:
this list looks good to me. highest prio for me is getting
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 11:36:25PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> With today's commit, pull-down language selection seems to work for
> package installed files. Also now we have Gnome desktop icon ;-)
great!
> It is usable, I think.
I think so too! :)
> > yeah, I also strongly prefer option
hi,
On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 10:22:24PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > > -- I'm afraid I wasn't involved other than reporting problems with the
> > > published version of Policy, and I don't think we made changes to our
> > > package in response to any requests from the www-team.
> > Am I correct to
hi,
dear debian-www people: src:developers-reference was just switched to
use sphinx, just like src:debian-policy. However, no upload to unstable
has been made yet...
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 08:13:50AM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> On Mon 22 Jul 2019 at 09:22pm +00, Holger Levsen wrote:
&g
Hi,
adding Sean to cc: for the question mentioned below.
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:24:41PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Do you know anyone good in this. Is there any volunteer? (I am
> seeking help on the mailinglist at sphinx-us...@googlegroups.com now)
I'm currently constantly asking on
Hi Osamu,
On Sun, Jul 07, 2019 at 10:52:23PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> You can build HTML and PDF with "make".
\o/
> debian/* still needs to be polished as of this posting.
ok :)
> The conversion process is completely recorded in the history. If main branch
> is update, we can rebase most
1 - 100 of 227 matches
Mail list logo
