[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [GNU-linux-libre] updates on nonfsg page

From: Sam Geeraerts
Subject: Re: [GNU-linux-libre] updates on nonfsg page
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 21:51:51 +0200
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20100415)

Karl Goetz wrote:
hi all,

I've just spent some time working through [1] and made quite a number
of edits[2]. I've tried to update entries with more references, and
checked for Debian bugs (as its my upstream) and commented with what I
find. I've filed a couple more, but don't have bug numbers for them yet.

Regarding style:
- afio -> Afio was part of my "packages names -> software names" plan [A].
- I don't care whether pipes are at the start or end of a line. My "2010-09-10T07:59:01" edit made everything consistent with the majority of entries. It would be nice if we can agree on one style and make it that in one big swoop, because (re-)reflowing according to personal preference detracts from the actual diff.

I do have some questions though.

We included boinc via gNS, and a very quick search of this list archive
didn't show any discussion past me saying I'd add it [3]. would we
consider [4] as an acceptable licence to allow us to reinclude it?

Probably not [B].

[5] is about command-not-found, which appears to work completely
differently in Debian. I've not run it (system too old), but the
problematic files/directories are not included in the package. Can
someone else provide input?

It's database is built with update-command-not-found, which extracts its data from Contents-*.gz. Should be OK, I think.

[6] is about the fonts lucida, but there are no references. could
someone provide them please?

Metapackages section i skipped, something to look through for another

I note teeworlds is still on the list. I gather from the thread last
time [7] that its considered free - shall i remove it?

I guess it's not a problem for distros, they aggregate it with other software anyway.

I skipped filing bugs on thunderbird(icedove)/xchat in debian, thought
i should follow up with someone first.

Is XV[8] actually used by distributions? The references don't explain
how/why its there.

Blame RMS [C]. :)

I reincluded a number of packages into gNS, following what i can find
out about the issues in the debian bts. I've looked at where versions
say things are fixed, and added it to the wiki. then compared to the
version in testing. if the version in testing is equal or greater,
removed it from our blacklist. (See parkes bzr branch for details).

[2] [3]


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]