Policy. So it would be good to file those bugs first.
--
Sean Whitton
and also running
> «i18nspector **/*.po», both emit multiple things that could be fixed,
> or improved.
Thanks for taking a look. I think I've successfully merged the two sets
of .po files, now, on the next branch.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
on the internationalisation.
Does anyone know what's going on?
The 'next' branch has the current state of play.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
+It may also be wise to ensure a fresh start by emptying or removing it at the
> +start of the ``binary`` target.
>
> When ``dpkg-gencontrol`` is run for a binary package, it adds an entry
> to ``debian/files`` for the ``.deb`` file that will be created when
Seconded.
It seems prudent t
Hello,
On Sat 20 Apr 2024 at 09:00pm +02, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Thu, 2024-03-28 at 09:58:29 +0800, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> On Thu 07 Mar 2024 at 11:22pm +01, Guillem Jover wrote:
>> > diff --git a/policy/ch-source.rst b/policy/ch-source.rst
>> &
Hello,
On Mon 15 Apr 2024 at 09:59am GMT, Holger Levsen wrote:
> 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.
>
>> > Co
.
That seems worth writing down.
Thank you Maytham for your work so far.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
html).
Hrm. That seems like a pretty serious problem :\
Holger L., did you know about this issue?
Did you decide it was worth publishing anyway?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
gt; need in providing more formats of this manual.
>>
>> Therefore we can close this and I will close 877337.
>
> fwiw, I disagree with this conclusion. single page txt and pdf versions
> are no replacements for single page html.
I agree, and still think we should be publishing
h services to run and in which order.
> """
> ^ is that "+" before "enabled" really intended? It looks weird to me.
Fixed in git, thanks.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
; dropping them. I guess this bug report will be closed unsolved instead.
In this case we weren't really making a decision on the Policy side, but
just updating documentation. So it can be changed back if the decision
is reversed.
--
Sean Whitton
Hello Holger,
I was thinking that maybe we could submit a joint Policy--DevRef BoF for
debconf, if you are going to be there.
--
Sean Whitton
Hello,
On Sat 06 Apr 2024 at 12:15pm +08, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Hi Russ,
>
> We have two seconded solutions, so you and I should perhaps break the
> tie. I prefer the Bill's 'Autobuild: no' solution as the more
> conservative change: we only have data about packages tha
network access for all non-free packages. How about you?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
his field is needed because otherwise to be able to get the test
>> dependencies, each source package would need to be unpacked.
Sounds good to me. If you'd like to propose wording, there's some more
guidance in our README.md. Thanks!
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Tue 02 Apr 2024 at 04:18pm +01, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Sean Whitton wrote:
>> On Tue 26 Mar 2024 at 10:11am -06, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> > I tend to agree with Sean that your rationale is not convincing.
>> > It sounds like you want to use policy as a st
f Debian guidelines and best practice?
>
> Is it ok, to have such "isolated copies" of packages as described above?
>
> I have not much experience in similar things, so I would like to get
> some comments here, please.
I mean, it seems okay to me, but it's up to the web team really.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
rity concerns. Would it be possible to extend this
> restriction to all archives?
We need to know if this is going to break existing packages and allow
some input from their maintainers. Are you able to prepare a list of
the affected packages?
--
Sean Whitton
ased on the documentation in dsc(5), but I don't
> know what the current process is. Does anyone have a link to a doc on
> how to submit a change?
There is a chapter of Policy regarding the Policy Changes Process.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
lso be wise ..." can you use one of the sets of
magic words from Policy 1.1, please?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
on't need
it, and to ensure installability on stable, or something similar.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
et this done).
>
> Closing #1066967 against sphinx-common/dh_sphinxdoc now.
> Thanks python people for your help!
Many thanks all for working on this, especially you Holger for this
scripting work. So, we're waiting in DSA and then on your script
changes, and it'll work again.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
; over the head and say "policy is not a stick."
This was basically my concern.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
roken dependencies, so still,
> prerms should not rely on dependencies, but only on essential packages.
I'm not sure that Policy is the place to discuss a change proposal like
this, and we can't render a swathe of packages RC buggy by making such a
change here. The archive would need to change first.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Mon 18 Mar 2024 at 04:06am -07, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 05:38:15PM +0800, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> Was there some recent packaging situation that prompted you to think
>> about this? I'm cautious about adding it in the absence of that.
>
Hello Josh,
Was there some recent packaging situation that prompted you to think
about this? I'm cautious about adding it in the absence of that.
--
Sean Whitton
ype=heads#L319
> to get such files copied over to debian.org during website build.
>
> But first, we need to have a working version in the binary package,
> since that's the basis for website build.
I guess I should have done a debdiff huh? :)
Thank you for the analysis. Osamu, Stéphane, could you take a look?
Thank you.
--
Sean Whitton
policy
>>manual seem to return HTTP 404 responses at the moment, meaning that the
>>intended Sphinx CSS theming fails to apply.
>>
>>[1] - https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/
>
> Hmm, locally built it's fine here ...
>
> @Stéphane: could you take a look?
T
control: tag -1 + pending
Hello,
On Sat 24 Feb 2024 at 08:52am +01, Holger Wansing wrote:
> Hi Sean,
>
> Sean Whitton wrote (Sat, 24 Feb 2024 11:58:59
> +0800):
>> Attached is the patch I prepared, which I couldn't get to work. Maybe
>> you can see what is wrong
Hello,
On Thu 15 Feb 2024 at 11:44pm +01, Holger Wansing wrote:
> Sean Whitton wrote:
>> On Fri 29 Dec 2023 at 07:08am +01, Stéphane Blondon wrote:
>>
>> > Yes, html_static_path must be set but it's already the case in conf.py.in:
>> > https://sources.debian.org
cond.
I think what you write in your patch is fair to proponents of
alternative init systems, though it would be good to have explicit
approval from one of them if someone has time. We could post your
updated patch to one of their lists?
Thank you for your efforts on this.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ngle release, they can still be used to provide
> - flexibility in building the same package across multiple
> - distributions or releases, where a particular dependency is met by
> - differently named packages.
> -
> .. [#]
> The relations ``<`` and ``>`` were previously allowed, but they were
> confusingly defined to mean earlier/later or equal rather than
--
Sean Whitton
actually write Policy text counts for more than abstract
discussions of best practice.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
need to keep
> the current setup.
That line is commented out, though. Are you saying it takes on its
default value in that case?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
#915583.
Possibly some of your changes could be applied on top of that?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
anism in Debian
> policy makes sense though.
When many/most Debian package maintainers need to know about this, as
they do debhelper compat, then we should add it, but until then, perhaps
not.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
here any code changes under consideration in response to this work?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
to get it work without everything properly
> installed/configured.
This doesn't seem to be enough to ensure that debian.css gets installed
to the .deb. I think we might also need to set html_static_path ?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
testing of some kind, at
least with screenreaders. But maybe the fact that you've based your
theme on an existing, popular Sphinx theme means this is covered?
Thanks again.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ould be in favour of the 25 lines criterion. The main problem with
manipulating d/copyright is only the really long licenses, IME.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
r work debhelper would automate. Replace it with
> a note that packaging helper frameworks do much of this work.
> ---
> policy/ch-source.rst | 35 +++----
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
LGTM.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
gt; decision? That way the matter can be closed one way or the other.
That would be a premature escalation -- if you want to drive this,
please approach the MIA team.
--
Sean Whitton
eave them be purely team
> maintained, to do so.
I wanted to do this some years ago, but the MIA team objected. So you'd
need to speak to them first.
--
Sean Whitton
Hello,
On Fri 16 Jun 2023 at 05:57PM +01, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> Is there anything needed from me to make progress on this? Any changes
> required to the last revision posted?
Yes, Russ posted some comments on your most recent revision, I believe.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Descr
if other interested
> people offer to maintain them and provide tested patches.
I'm sympathetic, though, this in itself is not a Policy issue.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
system does not know how to apply changes to services when
> updating
> +alternatives, so the resulting behavior would be confusing and unpredictable.
> +Instead, `aliases
> +<https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.unit.html#Description>`_
> +can be used to provide alternative implementations of the same named unit.
> +
> .. _s-maintscriptprompt:
>
> Prompting in maintainer scripts
Seconded.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ll one of Russ or I do so?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ault-logind virtual packages.
Thank you for reviewing. Do you have a rough idea of how long it would
be until you could confirm that this is viable, and implement it in sid?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
two levels
of normative language in Policy. It's simply untrue that all but one of
each of those is optional. Debian's normative landscape is more complex
than that.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Tue 06 Jun 2023 at 07:56PM -07, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Sean Whitton writes:
>
>> I think what's a bit peculiar here is using "must" for a case where
>> there might be package-specific exceptions. In other cases, Policy uses
>> "should&qu
t never" is our standard phrasing,
and "must not" is not any normatively weaker than "must never".
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ther message with some wording review.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ackages involved. For
example, configuration files used by systemd components should not
be diverted with dpkg-divert or the alternatives system without
agreement between not only the maintainers of the packages that ship
the files, but also the maintainers of the relevant systemd
e other than my mail client.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
king it no longer fun to maintain a package.
Yes, let's figure out a standard solution and write it in Policy.
The reasoning may well be applicable to similar things in the future.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ut it covers much of the
>> general case.
>
> Would you like me to reword/move the new snippet?
Yes, thank you. I will review the new version.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Mon 08 May 2023 at 12:52PM -07, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Sean Whitton writes:
>> On Mon 08 May 2023 at 08:48AM -07, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
>>> In other words, dpkg-divert is primarily for local administrators,
>>> non-Policy-compliant local packages
d tool needs to decide if it's building an image where
> tmpfiles snippets need to be ran, and if so pull in the preferred
> alternative.
This is a highly inspecific response, but: aren't things expressed by
dependencies generally less work for everyone than more special cases to
be handled by ea
at maintainers seemed to habitually make, the
former would make sense, but so far I think we have just one or a few
concrete examples, and so the correct thing to do seems to me to be to
add normative language for only the general case.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ation.
Just to note that Debian Policy's definition of these terms is not quite
the same as the RFC process definitions (I know you know this -- just
wanted to note that they're not the most relevant definitions).
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
hings that I think need to be resolved:
>
> [...]
Thank you for these thoughts.
I agree with you about what needs to be done.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
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.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
nts?
Thanks for filing the patch. As to your question, it's the latter (I'm
not sure whether or not the former is true, but in any case, Policy
contains recommendations in addition to musts and shoulds).
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-policy'
> package, i am not 100% sure a similar bug did not already exist. However, i
> could not find any existing similar bug.
No problem, thank you for checking!
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-o disappear = "$1" ]; then
>
> note the difference in quoting (one double quote added).
Thanks, but could you file this as a bug?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
the archive. I count 62
> (ignoring those with an alioth URL):
>
> * 26 on Svn
> * 3 on Cvs
> * 4 on Hg (2 are hg/hg-buildpackage)
> * 39 on bzr (half of these are actually bzr and related packages, which I
> maintain)
This strikes me as a matter for devref not Policy?
--
Sean Whitton
glish (if I understand
> how the translation machinery works).
>
> That said, we haven't tried to incorporate translation work in a while, so
> some of the machinery has probably rusted and will need repairs.
Yup, please create MRs with translations here:
<https://salsa.debian.org/dbnpolicy/policy-l10n-merge-requests-here>
--
Sean Whitton
ver the meat of the original
> report. See below.
We're sticking with 'stanza', and in light of that, could you confirm
that the bug is reopened in order to make additional fixes, rather than
back anything else out?
Thanks.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
bjections to uploading it before then; I just probably won't
> have time personally.
Thanks Holger for pointing this out. I'll cut a release today or
tomorrow.
--
Sean Whitton
I on it. For me, the recommendation would
> be documenting public sentiment on this topic.
>
> Source: https://trends.debian.net/rulesreqroot_testing-percent.png
Cool. I think that would be fine too.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
When it appears in a ``.changes`` file, it lists the names of the binary
> -packages being uploaded, separated by whitespace (not commas).
> +packages being uploaded, separated by whitespace (not commas). If only
> +source packages are being uploaded, this field will not be present.
>
> .. _s-f-Installed-Size:
Seconded.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
iled-upgrade *old-version* *new-version*
>
> If this works, installation continues. If not, Error unwind:
>
> @@ -410,7 +410,7 @@ These are the "error unwind" calls listed below.
>
> .. parsed-literal::
>
> - *new-postrm* abort-upgrade *old-version*
> + *new-postrm* abort-upgrade *old-version* *new-version*
>
> If this fails, the old version is left in a "Half-Installed"
> state. If it works, dpkg now calls:
Seconded.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
all of the
> +requirements discussed here. See the `Debian Installer internals manual
> +<https://d-i.debian.org/doc/internals/ch03.html>`_ for more information
> +about them.
>
> .. [#]
> Informally, the criteria used for inclusion is that the material meet
Seconded and applied, thanks.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
y itself is not
> going to be translated, I think that it can be advantageous if its
> contents can be discussed in simple words in people's native languages.
It may yet be translated! We have the po4a setup :)
--
Sean Whitton
not
sure why this would need to go to debian-devel -- seems like a Policy
team-internal thing.)
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
rmation about them.
>
> That could be as simple as saying "udebs (...) and source packages that
> produce only udebs do not comply"
Sounds good to me.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
`The Window Manager Specification
>> Project <https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Specifications/wm-spec>`_,
>
> Yes, this looks right to me. Seconded.
Likewise seconded, and applied. Thanks.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Sun 18 Sep 2022 at 05:34PM -07, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Sean Whitton writes:
>> On Mon 19 Sep 2022 at 12:45AM +02, Guillem Jover wrote:
>
>>> So, personally, I'd be happy to fully switch to stanza TBH, because it
>>> seems more specific to our
n of "stanza" in a footnote to mention it's a common alias or
> similar.
Hmm, I see.
> So, personally, I'd be happy to fully switch to stanza TBH, because it
> seems more specific to our use, probably easier to search for, and
> it's shorter.
I think this is fine f
ot; is for prose.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
format MBF.
--
Sean Whitton
the previous release cycle, I have split the mime-support into the
> media-types and the mailcap packages.
>
> The patch below updates the Policy to reflect that.
This is technically a normative change but since the change has already
been made in the archive, I've just gone ahead and a
in a second
> change. I think the second change also needs the base-passwd people in
> the loop.
The latter, please, assuming I'm not misunderstanding and the first
change makes things worse on the reproducibility front.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
without destroying existing references to chapter numbers?
Please go ahead and write a patch. The Policy Editors are happy to
review and edit proposed wording but we can't be responsible for
producing all of the text that gets added to Policy.
--
Sean Whitton
ight have a hard time
figuring out what to use, unless they happen to stumble across the
discussion in this bug.
What do you think about adding a condensed version of your reasoning to
the Policy Manual somewhere?
--
Sean Whitton
):
>
> mir-demos: /usr/share/wayland-sessions/mir-shell.desktop
Seems fine. Just to confirm, the primary use case is so that if a
package providing wayland-session is installed, a display manager like
gdm3 won't try to install GNOME?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
control: tag -1 + pending
Hello,
On Sat 29 Jan 2022 at 08:24PM GMT, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 at 21:26:53 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> On Fri 29 Oct 2021 at 11:12AM +01, Simon McVittie wrote:
>> > it seems like a good time to introduce {default-,}dbus-syste
gt; +distribution in Debian is derived from the upstream source.
> +
> +
> +Additionally, once documented in this manner, various tools such as
> +uscan or mk-origtargz can use
> +this information as instructions on how to automatically repack an
> + upstream source distribution into one suitable for use within Debian.
Nice.
--
Sean Whitton
have descriptions. It may also be worth adding a paragraph explaining
> that source packages may have descriptions as well, but are not required
> to.
Right. I don't think we even want to recommend them at this point. I
would not like to put any pressure on maintainers to write them.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello Guillem, Mattia,
On Fri 24 Dec 2021 at 01:42PM +01, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Tue, 2021-12-21 at 17:53:31 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>>
>> Is there really no name for the first paragraph other than "general
>> paragraph"?
>
> That's how the dpkg do
s only advisory based on how there is no
requirement on packages expressed must/should/etc. in the description of
Rules-Requires-Root: no in Policy. The target of the advice would be
authors and maintainers of package builders.
However, I missed the use of "required" in the text, which means there
is in fact a Policy requirement not to fail to build as non-root when
this field value is declared, I think?
Sorry for causing some confusion here.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
be confident that making this
change in Policy would not render more than a few packages buggy.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
of a
> +non-native package has an upstream component and a Debian component, and
> +there may be multiple Debian package versions associated with a single
> +upstream release version and sharing the same upstream source tar files.
> +
> +Most source packages in Debian are non-native.
> +
>
control: tag -1 + pending
Hello Johannes,
On Sat 20 Nov 2021 at 10:52PM +01, Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues wrote:
> Hi Sean,
>
> Quoting Sean Whitton (2021-11-19 23:13:46)
>> Can you turn this into a patch against our git repo, please?
>
> maybe I'm looking at the wrong
meant to be sent to d-devel, not just filed as a bug against
debian-policy, so perhaps you could do that and we'll give it a week,
then I'll go ahead and add these?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
contained: if you download
> all main or contrib source packages, that should give you the source
> code of all main and contrib binary packages.
I wonder if this idea that we want main+contrib to be self-contained
should be included in the text somehow? Or is it obvious?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
e.
Is there really no name for the first paragraph other than "general
paragraph"? Maybe "the source package's stanza"?
Also, how about "the text in this field describes all binary packages
which do not have their own Description: fields" ?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ng any architecture-specific restrictions for
>> the build architecture in question, except when the later alternative
>> has the same package name as the first alternative. This is to improve
>> consistency between repeated builds of a package while still allowing
>> version ranges of the same package.
Can you turn this into a patch against our git repo, please?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
he .dsc and as such end up in the Sources index. This is probably
> what we want anyway, but with all the people complaining about how big
> the index is getting it's something to consider. However it's also true
> that realistically very few packages are going to make use of this
>
Hello,
On Fri 17 Sep 2021 at 06:24PM -04, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sean Whitton writes:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> On Sun 25 Oct 2020 at 09:40PM -04, Joe Nahmias wrote:
>>
>>> Is this truly the case that all that's needed is a new patch? Can we g
1 - 100 of 672 matches
Mail list logo
