Re: [Neurodebian-devel] Neurodebian tasks (and Debian Science)
On 06.04.2016 14:36, Michael Hanke wrote:
>> Some Fields in neurodebian seem not to have 1:1 tasks in
>> debian-science: [...]
> Any discrepancy should be in favor of the non-neurodebian tasks,
> everything else is an ommision/bug in our side.
>> The debian-science task "science-neuroscience-congnitive" has no
>> corresponding "field" in neurodebian, but seems to belong there.
> Again, a core debian target is preferred, hence this is a non-issue
> from my PoV.
I must say that I didn't fully understand that. From your point of view,
Who actually shall feel responsible) for these tasks? NeuroDebian? Do
you say that these Debian tasks are the reference, and if NeuroDebian
does not match it is a bug in NeuroDebian but not in Debian? This is at
least how I did understand you; please correct me if I am wrong.
>> Wouldn't it make sense to move out the specific tasks
>> (science-electrophysiology. science-neuroscience-modelling,
>> science-neuroscience-datasets, science-psychophysics, and
>> science-neuroscience-congnitive) into the "neurodebian" package
>> (and remove it from debian-science)?
> If somebody does that and it doesn't imply a future increase in
> perceived responsibility of "NeuroDebian" to maintain this former
> debian-science task -- I am all for it.
The question here is (also) about responsibility. I guess you already
feel responsible for them, since you maintain, or "tag" them on your web
site already? Then it would IMO make perfect sense to extract them to a
separate package (resp. to the existing "neurodebian" package),
maintained by NeuroDebian.
> I am not convinced that the "install all at once" approach is an
> actual selling point for a real user (NeuroDebian users that is).
You already do this for your VMs, right? If you were not convinced, you
would not offer those ;-)
> I personally consider the task association as a "tag", no more. And
> I do mostly care about the second part of
> "science-neuroscience-cognitive" (neuroscience-cognitive), and much
> less about the prefix -- unless it is obscene ;-)
So, let's omit the prefix completely :-)
> But again, if this leads to the collateral damage that people are
> less likely to touch the task file because of this change of the
> umbrella from science (general) to neurodebian (less general), this
> would be a cost that I'd hate to pay.
Browsing the logs, these tasks are mainly unchanged in the last years.
There were some changes 2 years ago by Andreas Tille and by Yaroslav,
but after then they are unchanged. Therefore, I would rate the risk
higher that these tasks become unmaintained. A move to the neurodebian
package would IMO a step forward. If you generate them from tags, that's
perfect, it would keep them synchronous to your web site.
Would that make sense to you?