Re: `Every package must have exactly one maintainer'

To: Debian policy list <debian-policy@lists.debian.org>
Subject: Re: `Every package must have exactly one maintainer'
From: James Troup <J.J.Troup@scm.brad.ac.uk>
Date: 05 Mar 1998 13:34:57 +0000
Message-id: <[🔎] dmmra4h2rcu.fsf@dcsun4.comp.brad.ac.uk>
In-reply-to: Manoj Srivastava's message of "04 Mar 1998 23:06:48 -0600"
References: <[🔎] E0yAJc7-0006pL-00@chiark.greenend.org.uk> <[🔎] 8767lutfc1.fsf@tiamat.datasync.com> <[🔎] dmmzpj6dsfg.fsf@dcsun4.comp.brad.ac.uk> <[🔎] 87afb57ml3.fsf@tiamat.datasync.com>

Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@datasync.com> writes:

> James Troup <J.J.Troup@scm.brad.ac.uk> writes:
> 
> > This is IMHO a trite argument ...

[...]

> What *did* you mean here?

s/a trite argument/incorrect/. 

-- 
James

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: `Every package must have exactly one maintainer'
  - From: "Adam P. Harris" <apharris@onshore.com>

References:
- `Every package must have exactly one maintainer'
  - From: Ian Jackson <ian@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
- Re: `Every package must have exactly one maintainer'
  - From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@datasync.com>
- Re: `Every package must have exactly one maintainer'
  - From: James Troup <J.J.Troup@scm.brad.ac.uk>
- Re: `Every package must have exactly one maintainer'
  - From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@datasync.com>

Prev by Date: Re: making room
Next by Date: Re: Namespace pollution
Previous by thread: Re: `Every package must have exactly one maintainer'
Next by thread: Re: `Every package must have exactly one maintainer'
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread