Re: Policy Weekly Issue #4/4: Announcing new packages before uploading them
Santiago Vila Doncel wrote:
> On 29 Oct 1997, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > Surely we can come to a consensus on something this trivial?
>
> foo (1.0-2) unstable; urgency=low; closes=10002,11930,10109
>
> seems fine to me (using ";" after "=low").
Surely this is far from being trivial.
That line is parsed by several tools that should be modifyed to accept
such a change (not speaking of compatibility problems with previous
versions).
Putting the command embedded in the comments is IMHO the right way to
go, because existing programs won't reject those commands and we need to
modify only Guy's installer script (or adding a new tool, I don't know
how those scripts work. Is it possible to have a look at the scripts,
Guy? In case, someone [me, for example] could even help to modify them,
if you like.
Maybe it is now time to hear Guy's voice in the topic, but I suspect
that he is very busy at the moment.
Maybe Christian can summarize our discussion and post it to Guy, asking
for his authoritative comment?
Fabrizio
--
| fpolacco@icenet.fi fpolacco@debian.org fpolacco@pluto.linux.it
| Pluto Leader - Debian Developer & Happy Debian 1.3.1 User - vi-holic
| 6F7267F5 fingerprint 57 16 C4 ED C9 86 40 7B 1A 69 A1 66 EC FB D2 5E
> Just because Red Hat do it doesn't mean it's a good idea. [Ian J.]
Reply to: