Re: netscape 2.0-1 released
>brian white writes ("Re: netscape 2.0-1 released "):
>> >The empty lines in the Decription: should have at least a "." on
>> >them.
>>
>> The above was mentioned to me regarding my description of the netscape
>> package. Is this necessary? I have not included dots on the blank
>> lines (well, blank except for a leading space) of any of my previous
>> packages and none seem to have caused any problems with me on anyone
>> else.
>
>For crying out loud, surely you should read the standards documents
>(descriptions.txt in this case) before writing things, let alone
>before asking here on the mailing list ?
>
>You *must* include the dots. I'm not going to say why, so that you
>have to go and read it for yourself.
NOW LISTEN! I don't need this shit from you. When I first started
this system and asked for information, NOBODY gave me any help at all
so I figured it out on my own. I tried to find the document again,
but could not because of problems with YOUR servers.
No, I don't *have* to include tho dots as long as there is a space as
the leading character (as I said in my original post)! It works fine
without them. Nobody ever said a word about the other packages I have
released. If you *want* them included, then that is fine by me, but
be civil about it.
If you don't want my contributions then say so clearly and I will withdraw
my support of this system.
Brian
( bcwhite@bnr.ca )
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they're not.
Reply to: