On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 07:21:53PM -0500, James Vega wrote:
> lintian. I noticed a commit message saying that the move to vim-runtime
> was intentional. Should we move the manpage there as well? What was
> the reason for the move to vim-runtime? I couldn't find that.
The reason of the move was that vimtutor is arch independent while the
previous package who owned it (vim-common IIRC) was Architecture:any.
My opinion is that you should move the manpage together with vimtutor to
the vim-runtime package. I don't know if manpage in Architecture:all
packages need special treatmeant, but I doubt.
> Also, the description of vim-common and vim-runtime need to be updated
> if vimtutor is to stay in vim-runtime. Currently vim-common says it
> contains vimtutor.
Yep, it should be updated.
Good to hear that you're packaging vim7, how does the work proceed? I'm
interested in it. Are you working in the vim7 branch (or dir, dunno) of
our svn repository? Do you need help?
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- Computer Science PhD student @ Uny Bologna, Italy
zack@{cs.unibo.it,debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/
If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity
of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. -!-
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
|
