Re: free alternative to povray?
Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 07:16:58PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 04:04:07PM +0100, R?mi Letot wrote:
>>> The real problem is that those packages would loose all the other
>>> stuff debian provides : policy, BTS,...
>> You appear not to have read the proposed General Resolution.
>> It does not mandate the cessation of bug tracking services,
> Point of order: since the list of packages recognized by the bug
> tracking system is currently tied to those available from the FTP
> archives, the default assumption ought to be that such services will not
> continue.
> I believe that the GR should explicitly state that they *will* continue
> if its proponents expect this. Leaving it undefined is not adequate,
> since it's an important point and there has already been debate over it.
If the GR passed I'd rather see a clean cut, i.e. no more BTS for
non-free, because I do not think tracking bugs in packages which or
not under Debian's (Debian the project) control will work well.
If there is going to be no central tafkadnf[1] but singular
apt-repositories splattered over the whole net, it cannot work -
Should it track the bugs in Joe Random's package of arabtex or the
ones in Jane Urandom's one?
How would I qualify my personal package for tracking in the BTS?
OTOH if there was a centralized tafkadnf they should do their own
bugtracking because it might even be easier and it follows the goal of
the GR - clear separation. ("Sure this a package from Debian - just
take a look at bugs.debian.org/mypackage")
I am no DD yet. cu andreas
[1] the archive former known as debian non-free
--
Hey, da ist ein Ballonautomat auf der Toilette!
Unofficial _Debian-packages_ of latest unstable _tin_
http://www.logic.univie.ac.at/~ametzler/debian/tin-snapshot/
Reply to: