Re: unofficial package repository and the bugs system
On Wed, 22 Oct 1997, Bruce Perens wrote:
> Another question: are we obligated to protect the name-space for third-party
> packages? For example, someone makes the non-debian package "foobar" available,
> and a Debian maintainer then decides to issue a "foobar" package (assume it's
> the same software, that will usually be the case). Is the Debian maintainer
> obligated to change the name?
Aieee ! This is quite obviously rhetorical. But I hope its clear
to everyone. Debian worries about Debian. People use third party software
at their own risk. It would be the third party's job to conform to
Debian. Which means, if they care to do this, its easier to become a
developer (some automatic checking of rules, bug system , etc. makes
conformance easier). So hopefully, only packages that have a good reason
not to be in the official dist. would appear on the unofficial site. I
would hope that it doesn't become instead a junk yard. However, if that
is really what the RH equivalent has become, then chances are , the same
would happen to a Debian unoffical repository.
G John Lapeyre <firstname.lastname@example.org>
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
email@example.com . Trouble?
e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .