Bug#87510: I second this proposal
On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 12:33:20PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sat, May 19, 2001 at 10:49:28PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 11:08:01PM +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> > > > The other is that it's completely wrongheaded
> > > > to convert a policy from being entirely optional (you /may/ declare
> > > > build-depends) straight to being compulsory.
> > > Section 2.4.2 says /should/:
> > Yes, policy is currently riddled with such inconsistencies. It's a
> > significant bug that needs sorting out over the next 3-6 months. I
> > have a gameplan, but am not yet ready to work on it.
>
> For reference, anything that ought to be fixed in policy for woody needs to
> be done in the next one month.
Agreed. But we seem to have survived quite well with this stuff for
the last several months, so I don't regard it as RC to fix it. If you
want to provide a patch, it would be great, but I don't have the time
to do it right now. I am aiming to get all of the accepted proposals
into policy within the next week, and then leave policy as is for
woody.
Julian
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London
Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://people.debian.org/~jdg
Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/
Reply to: