[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFC/ITP: everybuddy-cvs

On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 06:24:55PM +0200, Peter Makholm wrote:
> People using unofficial packages should be aware about the
> dificulties. So I wouldn't mention the unofficial packages in control
> files for official Debian packages.

OK.  I'll mention it on the website for the unofficial ones.

> I also don't like the idea of having special packages for cvs-versions
> of software. It is cruft.

In this case, the CVS version is usually pretty far ahead of released, and
is just as stable.  Do you think I should switch the main package to using
CVS code?  Or just continue to do my unofficial CVS packages and have the
official ones be the released version?  I know the EB authors would prefer
that we not switch to CVS code, so I think that's a bad idea...but on the
other hand, the CVS code would be a "better" package for some debian

michael d. ivey        [McQ] : "It is a miracle that curiosity survives
   <ivey@gweezlebur.com>     : formal education."
http://gweezlebur.com/~ivey/ :                       -- Albert Einstein
 encrypted email preferred   :

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: