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

Re: VNC plans.



On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 09:56:52AM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> Then no, you don't. It was probably a mistake to ever attempt to
> codify the list of virtual packages in policy. Agreement amoung the
> people involved is sufficient.

I disagree.  The nature of the agreement needs to be documented
somewhere, so that when a new maintainer joins and packages something
that might qualify to use the virtual package, he:

* knows there is such a thing
* can determine from the definition of the virtual package whether or
  not his package actually qualifies

For instance, someone packaging yet another terminal emulator or window
manager for X should not completely ignore the virtual packages for
these things, which is more likely if you have to know the right people,
instead of having an FM to R.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson                |    To Republicans, limited government
Debian GNU/Linux                   |    means not assisting people they
branden@debian.org                 |    would sooner see shoveled into mass
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |    graves.          -- Kenneth R. Kahn

Attachment: pgpwF8nCuieNZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: