Re: APT

[Gustavo Niemeyer <niemeyer@conectiva.com>]

> Yeah, that was my plan.  I may make one more test release.  Current
> cvs has a ton more messages marked with _().  A few that probably
> shouldn't, and a few that probably still should.

I've integrated those. Good work!

> Jason, I am going to have to remove alot of the stream << handling. :|

Why?

> I'm slowly going thru the existing bugs, applying simple fixes(docs, etc).
> After I get most of those done, I'll do bug merging.

Bug merging!? Are you going to introduce new bugs? No, please! :-)

> > > Is there any place (mailing list, irc channel, etc) where you discuss
> > > APT development? I belive everybody would benefit if we get closer.
> >
> > The list is deity@lists.debian.org and I _think_ I saw a message
> > indicating it was unmoderated. These days it's mostly just bug
> > reports from Dan Jacobson though ;>
> 
> Yes, I caught one of the listmasters on irc, and poked him.

Btw, we could turn both lists into one, integrating the discussions.
We'd probably benefit from it, getting our development closer.

> > > You both are also welcome to the apt-rpm list [1], if you find it
> > > interesting. We have a pretty active community of users and
> > > contributors there.
> 
> I really don't know much about deep apt internals, and am not qualified to
> merge features like this.

You'll get there, if you're persistent enough. :-)

> > Someone else made a partial perl binding too, but I'm not sure where it
> > went..
> 
> apt-cache show libapt-pkg-perl.  Done by the perl maintainer.

No.. it doesn't work..

[niemeyer@ibook ~]% apt-cache show libapt-pkg-perl
W: Unable to locate package libapt-pkg-perl

;-))

-- 
Gustavo Niemeyer

[ 2AAC 7928 0FBF 0299 5EB5  60E2 2253 B29A 6664 3A0C ]