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

Re: haskell-sha

Hi again,

Joachim Breitner ha scritto:
>  * There seems to be a consensus for libghc6-*-doc for the doc package
> name for new packages.

No problem with it. Anyway, just out of curiosity, why is this so? Doc
packages seem to be compiler independent: why do they have a compiler
dependent name?

>  * Your watch file does not follow the shape that most package are
> using, it seems. But maybe we should switch to what I proposed in the
> mail „Re: Hackage vs. uscan (debian/watch) in darcs.d.o repos“ from
> 23.11.2009. Marco, did you have a look at that watch line? Is it ok, can
> it be improved or simplified? Do you feel like doing another round of
> mass-package-updates? :-)

So far, I've used the first model proposed in the email you're referring
to. Of course, I have no problems with changing it, if needed.

> I’m untagging the package until you adressed these issues, ok?

I think all this issues are fixed, so I'm releasing again (after the
lintian and cowbuilder run).

Giovanni Mascellani <mascellani@poisson.phc.unipi.it>
Pisa, Italy

Web: http://poisson.phc.unipi.it/~mascellani
Jabber: g.mascellani@jabber.org / giovanni@elabor.homelinux.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: