Re: Patch for WNPP page (Was: Please also decrease the number of adopted pages displayed)
David Prévot wrote:
> Please find attached the WML patch I'm going to push soon (just need
> some more testing, but it should be on line [0] in a few hours), some
> other new pages with copy and paste content are not included in the
> patch. If the many tags hurt your eyes, just have a look on the on line
My eyes can usually cope with WML, but if not, I tell w3m it's HTML.
I don't see any problems in the patch.
> pages [0] once they will be rebuilt (new version will have numbers of
> package in top of the front page [0]).
>
>> (On the other hand "orphan libraries" in the deborphan sense has
>> always struck me as being backwards, since it's the things that
>> depended on them that have disappeared...)
>
> With my deborphan new maintainer hat, I'd welcome some input there, will
> be back when we are ready to push the new branch.
I could understand if deborphan was a QA tool ("what dependent
packages would be in trouble if we RM-ed this parent library"), but
instead it uses "orphans" in the vague sense of "leftovers"; and then
it expects me to react to the discovery of such a pitiable foundling
by wanting to purge it. Oops, I'm back to using this mailinglist as
if it was called debian-justinmoaningaboutpackagenames.
--
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package
Reply to: