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

Re: ballview: Andreas is helped by Andreas

On Fri, 7 Nov 2008, Michael Banck wrote:
Can you maybe file ITPs etc. as well, I was almost going to package
ballview the other day.

I would like to make you remember that all information we have is
available at


OK - I'm somehow cheating.  I just added the WNPP bug number to our
bio task file and rerendered the pages.  But in most cases the task
file is maintained well enough to give you enough information about
the status of a prospective package.  But considering the fact that
you wanted to start some work on it I wonder whether you would have
found out that the current packaging is even in our SVN at


?  I used to put those project under

   "Experimental or unofficial Debian packages, projects with
    packaging stuff in SVN"

but gave the location of an unofficial package preference over the
link to SVN.  This might lead people like you to obtain packaging
stuff from the source package and inject it into a different
repository.  (BTW, I don't care whether a package is in Debian Med
or DebiChem repository - I just would like to avoid having the same
thing in different repositories.)

So the question I'm thinking about is: Should the tasks page
mention both (link to unofficial package AND SVN) if there are
both links available?

BTW, I really hope that this case somehow proves the sense of
this listing of prospective packages.  Recently Daniel Leidert
wrote me a very unhappy mail about my intend to help DebiChem
to maintain the same thing.  At least at Debian Science mailing
list somebody was interested but did not realised that the thing
I mentioned there is not ready yet.  I hope you understood my
reasoning there that I will continue only in case I get some
response which is different from the negative one I just got in
private mail.

Kind regards and thanks for your interest in ballview



Reply to: