[pkg-GNUstep-maintainers] New releases

[Gürkan Sengün]

--Signature=_Sun__10_Oct_2004_13_28_54_+0200_7lOsDIqwoho6aJrA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

> > i will wait for the latest foundation/application kit before i do a new=
=20
> > gnustep live cd. that'll allow packaging a few more applications that o=
nly=20
> > work with the current (or later) gnustep. can you make a gnustep-gui wi=
th=20
> > camaelon patch?
> > this is really something people want, we can just have it turned off by=
=20
> > default,
> > won't hurt anyone.
> I will do some test and I'm going to try to speak to Nicolas Roard.
ok thank you alot! i can help on testing. and can you put me on cc: if=20
you talk with nicolas by email? if you talk with nicoals on #gnustep at
irc.gnustep.org that's fine as well for me.


> > have you tried wildmenus?
> In the past, yes but not recently.
i've added a WildMenus On|Off wrapper, and a Debian menu entry...

> >>> Can we drop the .app from the gnustep-app-wrapper scripts link?
> >>> $ ls /usr/bin/*.app
> >>> /usr/bin/GWorkspace.app  /usr/bin/Gorm.app  /usr/bin/ProjectCenter.app
> >>> -> just GWorkspace, Gorm and ProjectCenter.
> >> Maybe we should ask in debian-devel fist to be sure they don't think t=
his=20
> >> namespace pollution ?
> > 19:23 < tarzeau> would having binaries called GWorkspace,Gorm,ProjectCe=
nter
> > in/usr/bin be namespace pollution?
> > 19:24 < asuffield> having crap in the path with capitals in it would be
> > pretty putrid in the first place
> > 19:25 < tarzeau> asuffield: don't worry it won't affect you if you don'=
t use
> > anything that is labeled "GNUstep" in the description
> > 19:25 < asuffield> that's no excuse for uploading anything
> > 19:25 < tarzeau> they already exist but with .app in the binary name (n=
ot
> > package, binary as in executable)
> > 19:25 < asuffield> so they're already broken
> > 19:25 < tarzeau> oh
> > 19:26 < tarzeau> would making them lowercase fix it?
> > 19:26 < tarzeau> is that in some policy? about capital letters in binary
> > executables?
> > 19:26 < asuffield> probably not, policy doesn't specify every silly thi=
ng
> > you can do
> > 19:29 < tarzeau> thanks
> We can also remove all apps wrapper in /usr/bin, just keep openapp ant
> opentool wrappers. This is the only way to make sure no one will say we're
> polluting namespace or we're doing silly things.
Weee.  NOOO :) we keep the apps wrapper binary and have e debian menu entry
that's the best. as deek says, there's no policy or any other standard tell=
ing
CapitalLetterBinaries are bad or anything. there's alot of other packages
having such binaries as well. But i vote for having the .app removed, won't=
 that
confuse GWorkspace thinking it's an app bundle? I have no .app on my binari=
es,
and let's have it at least removed on the non-generic binaries. i don't thi=
nk
the generic binary executables in /usr/bin are aproblem it's only one with
the deiban package names -> package terminal should be renamed to terminal.=
app etc... (i did that with my packages, and will do it for also the source=
 package
names....)

G=FCrkan

--Signature=_Sun__10_Oct_2004_13_28_54_+0200_7lOsDIqwoho6aJrA
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBaRz4fI36WwmZVIsRAuvjAJ0e7I0f1hKNhLUq/6zCCcNIus58ygCeMJJB
D+miqCCcKOx4Z4otHSGpOiQ=
=1ziV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Signature=_Sun__10_Oct_2004_13_28_54_+0200_7lOsDIqwoho6aJrA--