Re: .py endings or no .py endings for scientific packages
On 6/21/18 5:39 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Charles,
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 05:04:38PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
>> I would not argue that the reasons listed in the wiki are not good, but
>> usually we are arriving too late
> Unfortunately / most probably. That's why I recommended to inform
> upstream anyway for future projects. ;-)
>
>> Altogether, the upstream guide is good, dropping a note in the upstream
>> mailbox of issue tracker is fine,
> That was my point.
>
>> but for the sake of ourselves and our
>> users, I think that there is no need to change the command names when it
>> is too late.
>>
>> So, do we agree that opotional Lintian overrides are a good compromise ?
> I agree that a lintian override is a sensible way of documenting the
> issue and way better than just ignore the lintian warning.
@Charles, may I ask you to add this apparent consensus to the Debian Med
policy document?
Best,
Steffen
Reply to: