Hi, Am Dienstag, den 19.04.2011, 13:32 +0200 schrieb Giovanni Mascellani: > On 17/04/2011 16:25, Joachim Breitner wrote: > > fourth idea: Leave it as it is for now and hope that before the next > > release of wheezy we either had a haddock bump anyways (and from that > > time on installed stuff to a common location), or we can solve the > > problem with source-NMUs or source-only-uploads. > > I think this would be better: you previous proposals imply that you have > to move "manually" things that are in the dpkg database, and I don't > think this would be a good idea. Only the first two proposals, not the one that involved hacking haddock and Cabal to transparently look in the other paths. > A round of source-NMUs should be > lighter than the one we're doing now, because we'll just need to > reupload the same package (not upgrading the package or fixing > dependencies or desciptions, that has already been done). you still have to make sure that you build a package only when all dependencies have been fixed... and this order is not enforced by any build dependencies. And source-NMUs are not present yet, who knows when and if that becomes reality. Maybe we can have a policy of: Everytime someone in the DHG is annoyed by the index or links missing, he uploads that package to fix it :-) Gruß, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part