On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 11:31:53PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > [...] I'd suggest you should add these two Blends to
> > http://blends.debian.org/ to let users know about these new Blends.
> DebianParl is not a collection of packages - I consider it distracting
> and arguably even damaging to emphasize that aspect for DebianParl.
> Is it possible to add a blend to that page promoting not metapackages
> and bugs but only Homepage of the blend?
The page is an html page in git. You can link to whatever you want from
there. Last week I mentioned the doc where this is described here on
> NB! No need to tell me how code is open for changes and I am free to
> restructure: I know that anything is possible given enough amount of
> time and energy to convince peers to move in a certain direction - my
> question is *not* whether it is possible for me to invest time and
> efforts in changing structures to make it fit my different needs. My
> question is whether that is possible _without_ me allocating resources
> to it.
It depends whether you consider placing some lines into some html
document maintained in Git "allocating resources". :-P
> > Before I clone from the new location: Is there any reason not to use
> > git://git.debian.org/git/blends ? I'm just wondering ...
> Yes, there are reasons for that, but I am not in the mood: Branching is
> cheap - go fork the code if important to you to have it there.
It is not important for me. I was just wondering why you might create
extra work for potential co-workers from the Blends team to join an
additional team. Did you set at least ACLs for DDs?
> NB! I do notice that you are "just wondering". But I also know that you
> quite likely will ask further on any reflections I provide - or others
> will. Which is perfectly fine, but consumes time and energy. I want to
> do more fruitful stuff than defend a choice of git location.
Please save your time and do not defend any decision you have
intentionally drawn and you are free to draw. I write a separate mail
for those who are not that long on this list where I repeat my ideas
about Blends which seems to be necessary considering the last two
threads which have probably shown that I failed in explaining the whole
idea why I'm working on this.
- Re: Boxer
- From: Jonas Smedegaard <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Re: Boxer
- From: Holger Levsen <email@example.com>