[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#250202: mandate a common name for "patched source" and/or "unpacked source"



On Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 10:30:58PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > and I would change the last paragraph to really encourage the use, not
> > merely allow it:
> > 
> > | Although this file is only required in one specific case (see above),
> > | maintainers are encouraged to include a README.source file if the layout
> > | of the package is not trivial, so aid understanding of it, even if the
>                                      ^
> 				   as to
> > | above condition is not fulfilled.
> 
> No objection here. If none of the current seconders (that is, Julian
> Gilbey and Bill Allombert) object, I'll accept this.
> 
> Bill? Julian?

OK.

   Julian

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

        Julian Gilbey, website: http://www.polya.uklinux.net/
   Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see: http://people.debian.org/~jdg/
     Visit http://www.thehungersite.com/ to help feed the hungry



Reply to: