On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 08:57:07PM -0400, Charles Fry wrote: > > for the rest, I think I agree you do everything that has to be done, and > > much simplier than me. but please think at the .registry again. let > > think at the fact that PEAR may change their packaging format/methods > > without warning ... and if they do that ... let's say ... 2-3 monthes > > before etch ... that would *really* suck ... > > Well, you have a valid point. Perhaps this is the way to go. > > > I agree with you for all the rest, but I'm still convinced we *have* to > > let PEAR deal with its stuff, it's his job, his own, his dirty > > personnal intimate one. You don't want seriously to toy with it (IMHO). > > Then hopefully you can move forward on updating/moving your webpage. :-) > Most notably, you should be able to avoid creating the tarball > dynamically, and simply install using package.xml. > > I also hope that dh-make-pear can either implement these "policy" > decisions, or bring them back to the table for further discussion. I ve had less ti,e than what I thought; but I promise; I'll put those on the web under a VCS as soon as I come from my coming short vacation (meaning on mondy robably) -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madcoder@debian.org OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature