debian-policy Feb 2001 by author

[previous page]

Page 1 of 1

[next page]

[Thread Index] [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Other Debian Lists] [Debian Home]

Nicolás Lichtmaier

Bug#42052: Bug#45052: [OLD PROPOSAL] /var/mail and /var/spool/mail Feb 27

Nicolás Lichtmaier

Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04
Re: suid binaries should not be writable by owner Feb 07
Bug#78012: Origin and Bugs headers proposal Feb 03
Re: Question about native packages Feb 05
Bug#78012: Origin and Bugs headers proposal Feb 03
Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04
Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04
Re: native pkg versioning (was Re: Question about native packages) Feb 05
Re: Question about native packages Feb 04
Re: suid binaries should not be writable by owner Feb 07

Sébastien Montagne

Bug#84236: Date typo in upgrading-checklist.text.gz Feb 01

Adrian Bunk

Re: only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20
Re: only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20
Re: only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20
Re: only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 20
Re: Question about native packages Feb 04
Re: Question about native packages Feb 04
Re: only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 21
Re: only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20
Re: Question about native packages Feb 04
Question about native packages Feb 04
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 21

Alexander Hvostov

Re: Bug#88045: Policy is contradictory (I think) Mar 01
Re: Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Re: Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Re: Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Feb 28
Re: Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Re: Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Re: Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01

Anthony Towns

Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 21
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25
Bug#83977: PROPOSED] include Perl Policy Feb 11
Re: Frozen distribution? Feb 18
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25
Re: should vs must Feb 27
Bug#85500: PROPOSED] please strengthen section 2.3.8.1's stance on messages in postinsts Feb 11
Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Re: Frozen distribution? Feb 17
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25
Bug#81852: Making the crypto proposal an amendment Feb 14
Re: should vs must Feb 27
Re: Please add auto-forwarding feature to BTS (was: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 05
Re: Policy rewrite: chs 1 & 2 Feb 19
Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 10
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 21
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 22
Re: should vs must Mar 01
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 21
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 21
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Mar 01
Re: Frozen distribution? Feb 17

Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho

Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25
Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet Feb 13
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25
Bug#87828: PROPOSAL] Deprecate confusing Build-Depends arch syntax Feb 28
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25

Arthur Korn

Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet Feb 16
Re: only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20
Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet Feb 20

badmail

Bug#87711: Message Undeliverable! Feb 26

Bas Zoetekouw

Bdale Garbee

Bug#81852: seconded Feb 06

Ben Collins

Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 08
Re: Bug#87159: explanation of Build-Depends et. al. is unclear Feb 23
Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 08

Bob Hilliard

Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 21

Brendan O'Dea

Bug#83977: PROPOSED] include Perl Policy Feb 11
Bug#83977: PROPOSED] include Perl Policy Feb 13
Re: suid binaries should not be writable by owner Feb 08
Bug#83977: PROPOSED] include Perl Policy Feb 20
Bug#83977: PROPOSED] include Perl Policy Feb 20
Bug#83977: PROPOSED] include Perl Policy Feb 04
Bug#83977: PROPOSED] include Perl Policy Feb 08
Bug#83977: PROPOSED] include Perl Policy Feb 20

Brian May

Re: Bug#83669: Shared libraries Feb 04
Re: native pkg versioning (was Re: Question about native packages) Feb 05
Bug#83669: Shared libraries Feb 05
Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Re: seeking resolution to issues I have raised Feb 27
Re: native pkg versioning (was Re: Question about native packages) Feb 05
Re: suid binaries should not be writable by owner Feb 08
Re: suid binaries should not be writable by owner Feb 07
Bug#83669: Shared libraries Feb 04
Re: Native packages, broken uploads, and debian policy Feb 04
Re: Native packages, broken uploads, and debian policy Feb 03
Re: Native packages, broken uploads, and debian policy Feb 02
Re: Please add auto-forwarding feature to BTS (was: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 05
Re: Frozen distribution? Feb 17
Bug#83669: Shared libraries Feb 04
Bug#83669: dynamic creation of libx.so.n Feb 05
Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 08
Re: Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Re: suid binaries should not be writable by owner Feb 07
Re: Frozen distribution? Feb 18
Re: Native packages, broken uploads, and debian policy Feb 04
Bug#83669: dynamic creation of libx.so.n Feb 05
Bug#88058: PROPOSAL] ftp-client virtual package Mar 01
Bug#83669: Shared libraries Feb 03
Re: Native packages, broken uploads, and debian policy Feb 03
Re: suid binaries should not be writable by owner Feb 06
Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 10
Re: Frozen distribution? Feb 16
Bug#83669: Shared libraries Feb 03
Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 10

Brian Mays

Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04
Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04

Brian Russo

Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 20
Re: only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20
Re: request for guidance Feb 23
Re: only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20
Re: seeking resolution to issues I have raised Feb 28
Re: only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20
Re: only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25

Chris Lawrence

Re: suid binaries should not be writable by owner Feb 06
Re: suid binaries should not be writable by owner Feb 07
Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Feb 28
Re: FHS, netscape and Dan Bernstein Feb 06
Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04
Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04

Chris Waters

Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04
Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04
Re: Is the stable/unstable split broken? Feb 06
Re: FHS, netscape and Dan Bernstein Feb 06
Re: native pkg versioning (was Re: Question about native packages) Feb 05
Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04
Re: Please add auto-forwarding feature to BTS (was: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 05

Colin Watson

Re: seeking resolution to issues I have raised Feb 27
Bug#84641: debian-policy: Obsolete virtual packages Feb 03
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 21

D. Stimits

suggestion Feb 17

Debian Bug Tracking System

Bug#84636: marked as done (typo in virtual package list) Feb 15
Bug#85508: marked as done (policy 5.2 has an unclear sentence) Feb 15
Processed: proposal has three seconds, changing bug title and severity Feb 27
Bug#85982: marked as done (policy ch7 grammar issues) Feb 15
Processed: Making the crypto proposal an amendment Feb 13
Bug#85506: marked as done (policy 5.2 does not say that binary-indep must be non-interactive) Feb 15
Bug#83069: marked as done ([ACCEPTED 22/01/2001] bringing X app-defaults policy into the era of XFree86 4) Feb 19
Bug#84079: marked as done (debian-policy: proposal.* documents are obsolete) Feb 15
Bug#85501: marked as done (typo in policy process chapter 3) Feb 15
Bug#86001: marked as done (ch13 typo) Feb 15
Processed: Reassign back to base-passwd Feb 19
Bug#40180: marked as done (packaging manual typo) Feb 14
Bug#85505: marked as done (policy section 4.0, upstream-version is poorly worded) Feb 15
Processed: merge bugs Feb 15
Bug#65847: marked as done (packaging-manual: no mention of Build-Depends in chapter 4) Feb 15
Bug#85504: marked as done (grammar issue in policy 3.2.1) Feb 15
Bug#81852: Info received (was second) Feb 07
Bug#40864: marked as done (debian-policy: Section 5.8 refers to /usr/doc/package) Feb 22
Bug#42477: marked as done ([OLD PROPOSAL] delay the /usr/doc transition till after potato) Feb 22
Bug#84641: marked as done (debian-policy: Obsolete virtual packages) Feb 15
Bug#85986: marked as done (policy ch9 grammar issues) Feb 15
Bug#85510: marked as done (policy 6.1 typo) Feb 15
Bug#85511: marked as done (policy 6.5 grammar issue) Feb 15
Processed: amendment has 2 m's not 3 ;p Feb 27
Bug#84236: marked as done (Date typo in upgrading-checklist.text.gz) Feb 18
Bug#40706: marked as done ([REJECTED 21/7/99] /usr/share/doc vs. /usr/doc transition) Feb 22
Bug#83063: marked as done ([PROPOSED] enhanced x-terminal-emulator policy) Feb 15
Bug#85993: marked as done (policy ch10 grammar) Feb 15
Processed: change submitter Feb 10
Processed: reassign to policy Feb 18
Processed: Re: Bug#83069: PROPOSED] bringing X app-defaults policy into the era of XFree86 4 Feb 15
Bug#62070: marked as done (Package freeze makes no sense for package) Feb 22
Processed: Retitle proposal Feb 27
Bug#88045: marked as done (Policy is contradictory (I think)) Mar 01
Bug#26402: marked as done ([PROPOSED] packaging manual needs clarification about conffiles) Feb 15
Bug#6206: marked as done (dpkg documentation needs slight modification) Feb 14
Bug#85514: marked as done (more policy 6.5 grammar / typo issues) Feb 15
Processed: change submitter Feb 10
Processed: Re: Bug#84236: Date typo in upgrading-checklist.text.gz Feb 01
Bug#85497: marked as done (typo in policy manual) Feb 15
Bug#83487: marked as done (please add HTML version of FHS) Feb 15
Bug#84631: marked as done (typo in policy manual) Feb 15

Debian Installer

debian-policy_3.5.1.0_i386.changes INSTALLED Feb 15
debian-policy_3.5.2.0_i386.changes INSTALLED Feb 19

debian-policy

CVS jdg: * Add "links" to Build-Depends list Feb 15
CVS jdg: Clarified upgrading-checklist note about source dependencies Feb 21
CVS jdg: * Correct date in virtual packages list Feb 13
CVS jdg: Correct "=3D" -> "=" Feb 06
CVS jdg: * Removed Richard Braakman from list of maintainers at his request Feb 13
CVS jdg: * Add XFree86 app-defaults ammendment closes: Bug#83069 Feb 18
CVS jdg: * Corrected typos and grammatical errors found by Sean Perry Feb 15
CVS jdg: Fix packaging-manual recommendation Feb 18
CVS jdg: * Undo Build-Depends change; Manoj had already done it and I hadn't noticed! Feb 15
CVS jdg: Removing proposal.sgml Feb 15
CVS jdg: Correct <emph> -> <em> in policy.sgml app-defaults patch Feb 18
CVS jdg: * Corrected typos and grammatical errors found by Sean Perry Feb 13
CVS jdg: Policy should now conflict with and replace packaging-manual Feb 25
CVS jdg: * Removed defunct virtual package names (closes: #84641) Feb 13

Dr. Guenter Bechly

Bug#86507: recommends removed package Feb 18

Edward Betts

Bug#88045: Policy is contradictory (I think) Mar 01

Frank Belew

Bug#83669: Shared libraries Feb 03

Gordon Sadler

Re: seeking resolution to issues I have raised Feb 27

Henrique M Holschuh

Re: Question about native packages Feb 04
Re: Native packages, broken uploads, and debian policy Feb 03
Re: Question about native packages Feb 04
Re: Question about native packages Feb 04
Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 08
Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 09
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 20
Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 09
Re: Native packages, broken uploads, and debian policy Feb 04
Bug#76868: PROPOSED] invoke-rc.d interface to invoke initscripts Feb 23
Re: Question about native packages Feb 04
native pkg versioning (was Re: Question about native packages) Feb 04
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25
Native packages, broken uploads, and debian policy Feb 02
Re: native pkg versioning (was Re: Question about native packages) Feb 05
Re: Question about native packages Feb 04
Bug#87994: [PROPOSAL] better initscript definition, and adding 'restart-if-running' Feb 28
Re: Native packages, broken uploads, and debian policy Feb 03
Re: request for guidance Feb 23
Bug#85270: [PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 08
Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 09
Re: Please add auto-forwarding feature to BTS (was: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04
Re: Native packages, broken uploads, and debian policy Feb 03

Herbert Xu

Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04
Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04
Bug#83669: dynamic creation of libx.so.n Feb 05
Bug#83669: dynamic creation of libx.so.n Feb 05
Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04

hmh

Bug#76868: final revision of policy diff, and related scripts Feb 27

idalton

Re: proper location for cross-compilers in Debian? Feb 03
Re: proper location for cross-compilers in Debian? Feb 03

Jason Gunthorpe

Re: Bug#83669: Shared libraries Feb 04
Re: Bug#87159: explanation of Build-Depends et. al. is unclear Feb 23
Re: Bug#83669: Shared libraries Feb 04

jcdubacq

Re: [ot?] where do we go from here with nomenclature? Feb 14

Jim Lynch

Re: only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20
Re: Please add auto-forwarding feature to BTS (was: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 05

Joey Hess

Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet Feb 13
Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Feb 28
suid binaries should not be writable by owner Feb 06
Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 08
Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 08
Re: when to call ldconfig Feb 13
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 21
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 21
Re: suid binaries should not be writable by owner Feb 06

John Galt

Re: Frozen distribution? Feb 17
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 22
Re: FHS, netscape and Dan Bernstein Feb 06
Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet Feb 20
Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 06

Jonathan D. Proulx

Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04

Josip Rodin

Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Feb 28
Re: seeking resolution to issues I have raised Feb 27
Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Re: debian-policy_3.5.1.0_i386.changes INSTALLED Feb 15
Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Re: only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 27
Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Feb 28
Re: seeking resolution to issues I have raised Feb 28
Re: seeking resolution to issues I have raised Feb 27

Julian Gilbey

Bug#85982: policy ch7 grammar issues Feb 15
Re: Frozen distribution? Feb 18
Re: Frozen distribution? Feb 15
Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Feb 28
Re: removal of subdirs under /usr/local Feb 13
Bug#82310: Provides: java-servlet-engine Feb 13
Re: should vs must Feb 27
Bug#76868: PROPOSED] invoke-rc.d interface to invoke initscripts Feb 23
Re: Policy rewrite: chs 1 & 2 Feb 20
Bug#72335: PROPOSED] Optional build-arch and build-indep targets for debian/rules Feb 27
Bug#87007: policy : ch 9 sect 2.2 Feb 22
Policy rewrite: chs 1 & 2 Feb 19
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25
Frozen distribution? Feb 15
Bug#88058: [PROPOSAL] ftp-client virtual package Feb 28
Re: Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Bug#87159: explanation of Build-Depends et. al. is unclear Feb 23
Re: Frozen distribution? Feb 18
Re: [PROPOSAL] Allowing crypto in the main archive Feb 20
Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Policy rewrite: chaps 3-6 Feb 27
Bug#85503: section 3.1 of policy is confused Feb 13
Bug#42052: Bug#45052: [OLD PROPOSAL] /var/mail and /var/spool/mail Feb 26
Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet Feb 20
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25
Re: when to call ldconfig Feb 14
Bug#83977: PROPOSED] include Perl Policy Feb 20
Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet Feb 20
Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Bug#87711: PROPOSAL] Clarification of example configuration files Feb 26
Re: when were Build-Depends placed in policy? Feb 21
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 21
Bug#81852: Making the crypto proposal an amendment Feb 14
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25
Re: should vs must Feb 27
Re: Policy rewrite: chs 1 & 2 Feb 20
Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Bug#85815: packaging-manual: about dpkg:UpstreamVersion and dpkg:Version substvars Feb 13
Bug#87233: wording in section 9.2.2 could be better Feb 25
Bug#85982: policy ch7 grammar issues Feb 15
Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet Feb 13
Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet Feb 20
Re: should vs must Feb 26
Bug#87828: [PROPOSAL] Deprecate confusing Build-Depends arch syntax Feb 27
Re: suid binaries should not be writable by owner Feb 06
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25
Re: Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Mar 01
Re: when to call ldconfig Feb 13
Bug#87510: [PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25
Bug#87711: [PROPOSAL] Clarification of example configuration files Feb 26
Re: Frozen distribution? Feb 18
Re: debian-policy_3.5.1.0_i386.changes INSTALLED Feb 15
Re: Frozen distribution? Feb 16
Bug#76868: PROPOSED] invoke-rc.d interface to invoke initscripts Feb 25
Re: seeking resolution to issues I have raised Feb 28
Bug#85986: policy ch9 grammar issues Feb 15
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 28
Re: Size limit for compressing files Feb 15
Incorporating packaging manual in policy Feb 06
Re: Incorporating packaging manual in policy Feb 07
Re: suid binaries should not be writable by owner Feb 07
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25
[PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet Feb 13
Bug#85511: policy 6.5 grammar issue Feb 13

Juliusz Chroboczek

Bug#88045: Policy is contradictory (I think) Feb 28

lamont

Bug#81852: second Feb 07

Manoj Srivastava

Re: Native packages, broken uploads, and debian policy Feb 04
Bug#85500: PROPOSED] please strengthen section 2.3.8.1's stance on messages in postinsts Feb 13
Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04
Bug#85500: PROPOSED] please strengthen section 2.3.8.1's stance on messages in postinsts Feb 13
Re: native pkg versioning (was Re: Question about native packages) Feb 05
Re: FHS, netscape and Dan Bernstein Feb 06
Bug#84236: Date typo in upgrading-checklist.text.gz Feb 01
Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 09
Re: Native packages, broken uploads, and debian policy Feb 04
Bug#83977: PROPOSED] include Perl Policy Feb 04
Re: Question about native packages Feb 04
Re: Incorporating packaging manual in policy Feb 06
Bug#83977: PROPOSED] include Perl Policy Feb 08
Re: Native packages, broken uploads, and debian policy Feb 02
Re: Question about native packages Feb 04

Marcelo E. Magallon

Bug#83669: Shared libraries Feb 04
Re: when were Build-Depends placed in policy? Feb 21
Re: Question about native packages Feb 04

Marco d'Itri

Re: proper location for cross-compilers in Debian? Feb 03

Marcus Brinkmann

Re: Size limit for compressing files Feb 15
Bug#83669: dynamic creation of libx.so.n Feb 05
Re: seeking resolution to issues I have raised Feb 28

Mark Baker

Bug#85982: policy ch7 grammar issues Feb 14

Mark Brown

Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04

Martin Michlmayr

Re: only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 20
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25

Massimo Dal Zotto

Re: suid binaries should not be writable by owner Feb 07

Matthew Palmer

Re: FHS, netscape and Dan Bernstein Feb 06

Matthew Vernon

only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20

Moshe Zadka

Re: seeking resolution to issues I have raised Feb 28

paulwade

Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04
Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04

Peter Palfrader

Bug#86436: Build-Depends: should vs may Feb 18
Bug#86436: Build-Depends: should vs may Feb 18
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 20

philippe batailler

Bug#87007: policy : ch 9 sect 2.2 Feb 22

Rafael Laboissiere

Size limit for compressing files Feb 15

Raul Miller

Re: FHS, netscape and Dan Bernstein Feb 06
FHS, netscape and Dan Bernstein Feb 06
Re: FHS, netscape and Dan Bernstein Feb 06
Re: FHS, netscape and Dan Bernstein Feb 06

Ray Ferrari

Linux Professional Institute Feb 16

Remco Blaakmeer

Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet Feb 16

Rene Mayrhofer

Re: [PROPOSAL] Allowing crypto in the main archive Feb 20

Richard Braakman

Re: Policy rewrite: chs 1 & 2 Feb 20
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 21
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 25

Roland Mas

Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet Feb 20

Sam Hartman

Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 08
Re: only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20
should vs must Feb 26
Re: Frozen distribution? Feb 19

Sam TH

Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04
Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04
Re: seeking resolution to issues I have raised Feb 27
Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04
Re: Please add auto-forwarding feature to BTS (was: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 05
Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04

Santiago Vila

Re: Frozen distribution? Feb 15
Re: seeking resolution to issues I have raised Feb 28
Bug#42052: Bug#45052: [OLD PROPOSAL] /var/mail and /var/spool/mail Feb 27
Re: Frozen distribution? Feb 16
Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Feb 28
Bug#87711: PROPOSAL] Clarification of example configuration files Feb 26

Sean 'Shaleh' Perry

Bug#85982: policy ch7 grammar issues Feb 14
Bug#85500: PROPOSED] please strengthen section 2.3.8.1's stance on messages in postinsts Feb 11
Bug#85503: section 3.1 of policy is confused Feb 10
Bug#85506: policy 5.2 does not say that binary-indep must be non-interactive Feb 10
Bug#85510: policy 6.1 typo Feb 10
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 20
Bug#85505: policy section 4.0, upstream-version is poorly worded Feb 10
Bug#86001: ch13 typo Feb 14
Bug#86436: Build-Depends: should vs may Feb 18
Bug#84636: typo in virtual package list Feb 02
Re: seeking resolution to issues I have raised Feb 27
RE: only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20
Bug#88029: allow rules file to be non-makefile Feb 28
help on a request that lintian know about libtool's .la files Feb 16
Bug#85986: policy ch9 grammar issues Feb 14
Re: only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 21
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 21
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 21
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 21
RE: packages with really old standards version Feb 20
Bug#87159: explanation of Build-Depends et. al. is unclear Feb 23
RE: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 05
Bug#85511: policy 6.5 grammar issue Feb 10
call for lintian help Feb 16
Re: seeking resolution to issues I have raised Feb 27
only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20
Bug#85508: policy 5.2 has an unclear sentence Feb 10
when were Build-Depends placed in policy? Feb 21
Bug#84631: typo in policy manual Feb 02
seeking resolution to issues I have raised Feb 27
Bug#85504: grammar issue in policy 3.2.1 Feb 10
request for guidance Feb 23
proper location for cross-compilers in Debian? Feb 02
packages with really old standards version Feb 20
Bug#87510: PROPOSAL] Make build dependencies a MUST Feb 28
Bug#85993: policy ch10 grammar Feb 14
Bug#85514: more policy 6.5 grammar / typo issues Feb 10

Sean Perry

Bug#85497: typo in policy manual Feb 10
Bug#85500: [PROPOSED] please strengthen section 2.3.8.1's stance on messages in postinsts Feb 10
Bug#85501: typo in policy process chapter 3 Feb 10

Seth Arnold

Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet Feb 20
Re: Directing Debian users to use project BTSes - should we? Feb 04
Re: packages with really old standards version Feb 20
Re: suggestion Feb 17
Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet Feb 20
Re: native pkg versioning (was Re: Question about native packages) Feb 05
Re: only release packages that have maintainers? Feb 20
Re: Frozen distribution? Feb 18
Re: Frozen distribution? Feb 17
[ot?] where do we go from here with nomenclature? Feb 14

Siggi Langauf

Re: Question about native packages Feb 04
Re: Question about native packages Feb 04
Re: Question about native packages Feb 04
Re: Question about native packages Feb 04
Re: Question about native packages Feb 05
Re: Question about native packages Feb 04

Thom May

Bug#82310: Provides: java-servlet-engine Feb 13

Wichert Akkerman

Bug#78012: Origin and Bugs headers proposal Feb 02
Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 13
Bug#78012: Origin and Bugs headers proposal Feb 03
Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 09
Bug#87233: wording in section 9.2.2 could be better Feb 23
Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 08
Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 09
Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 08
Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages Feb 09
Bug#78012: Origin and Bugs headers proposal Feb 03
Re: Incorporating packaging manual in policy Feb 07
Bug#81852: Making the crypto proposal an amendment Feb 13
Re: Native packages, broken uploads, and debian policy Feb 03

The last update was on 06:14 GMT Sun May 12. There are 470 messages. Page 1 of 1.

[previous month]

[previous page]

Page 1 of 1

[next page]

[Thread Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Other Debian Lists] [Debian Home]

Mail converted by MHonArc