Re: "How to recognise different ETCH wishlists from quite a long way away" (revised)
On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 07:28:47 +0200, Christian Perrier <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> Dunno which section of your list this should pertain but "Enforce
> the use of po-debconf for debconf templates" is in my mind.
> This probably needs a few s/SHOULD/MUST in the policy so that we can
> file RC bugs on packages which still use the "old style" debconf
> l10n system.
Why do we need to beat peope on the head with policy before
they do this? Could we have a list of people who are resisting this
> There are few of these and, IIRC, none of them are really critical
> packages. Some work was done a few months ago, including NMUs, but
> the release priorities have stopped it.
Do you have a (perhaps partial) list f packages still using
the old mechanism? An idea of the magnitude of the impact of this
policy change would be helpful in deciding whether or not to change
> I also think think about enforcing the use of debconf for packages
> during config step so that NO package prompts users outside debconf
> and interrupts installs/upgrades (wvdial comes to my mind).
It is not possible in all cases to ask all the questions
before a package is unpacked.
"Mr. Spock succumbs to a powerful mating urge and nearly kills Captain
Kirk." TV Guide, describing the Star Trek episode _Amok_Time_
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C