Re: Please check med-bio-ngs, med-bio-phylo and med-cloud

[Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu>]

Hi Afif,

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:51:31AM -0800, Afif Elghraoui wrote:
> 
> Right now we have science-bio depending on med-bio. If I moved on, we
> would have had science-bio > med-bio > med-bio-ngs, med-bio-phylo. When
> I saw previous discussions of this science-bio/med-bio situation on list
> archives, it was that it doesn't matter because the dependency resolver
> considers them all the same.
> 
> Since all these tasks packages are part of the Blends group anyway, is
> there any advantage for us to put all these scientific packages into
> med-bio-* vs science-bio-*? There are technically differences between
> biological software and biomedical software which I think get blurred
> and might cause confusion.

I think the main point why we should care about the med-* name space
inside the Debian Med team is that we have a dedicated team with
competence in this field.  I consider the science-* packages as not as
fine grained metapackages that are less probable to be installed but
rather as information for the users on the tasks page (we might consider
even "Metapackage: false" here).

> >  Today I
> > will upload the current status to make a "legal" upload to unstable that
> > will reach testing automatically.  I'm perfectly fine if we do the
> > restructuration in Stretch+1.
> 
> Sure. Reads like a plan.

Fine.

Kind regards

       Andreas. 

-- 
http://fam-tille.de