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

Re: Metapackages in "Section: metapackages" or not (Was: visibility of Debian Pure Blends)

Quoting Andreas Tille (2014-10-26 17:17:37)
> On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 02:49:24PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>> [IMO it should not] be mandatory for blend packages to be tagged as 
>> metapackages (in the form they are currently handled).
> It is not mandatory by blends-dev.  [implementation details skipped] 
> For me it becomes more and more evident that we need to discuss more 
> on this list about needs of different Blends and how to correctly 
> implement this.

Well, one reason for lack of discussion in the past is that (as far as I 
am aware) only one tool for creating blends have existed: blends-dev.

Assuming you mean discussion (also) across tools, I look forward to some 
friendly competition, now that boxer is finally in a reasonably usable 
state (after 2 failed attempts, first one dating back to February 2011).

If all goes well (after dramatic events less than an hour before 
deadline of "freeze minus 10 days" - see details at bug#766903), it is 
likely that boxer even enters Jessie!

 - Jonas

 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature

Reply to: