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

Re: Packaging guidelines: IPv6




seth vidal schrieb:
> On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 15:37 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> Arjan van de Ven schrieb:
>>> On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 13:50 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 08:02 -0400, seth vidal wrote:
[...]
>>> And if there is really no functional requirements in the spec.. maybe
>>> there should be a second spec/recommendation for functional things? That
>>> could be useful for external projects as well, as a checklist in the
>>> "did we forget anything to be useful to a wide audience" kind of way..
>> Can't hurt.
> Who would do this and what would motivate them? 

It seemed to me some people were interested in maintaining such a list.
E.g. like

"A superb extras package should
- support UTF8
- IPv6
..."

If some people want that then it okay for me.

> If it is just their own
> interest in the package then by all means, let them, but leave this out
> of the extras packaging guidelines.

Of course.

> it does not bear even a passing resemblance to something useful to
> further clutter up the packaging guidelines with.

Exactly.

Cu
thl


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