Ubuntu and packages not in Debian article fitting for DPN?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi all,
when wrapping up this week's issue of the DPN[0] we (that is Alexander
Reichle-Schmehl and myself) noticed that there's an article included
that in our view isn't really that fitting for the DPN topic-wise.
The article in question is the "Ubuntu and packages not in Debian"
article that basically sums up this blog post[1]. In our perception this
post talks about the quality of packages in Ubuntu and we don't really
see its relevance for the DPN readers, especially since it explicitly
deals with packages *not* in Debian.
We don't want to arbitraryly remove contributions, so we would like to
have a few more opinions on that article and whether or not in should be
included in the next DPN. In our view only the blog post is not really
fitting. If there are any follow-ups or implications that also touch
Debian the article could become more relevant but in the current state
we'd rather leave it out.
What do you think?
Best regards,
Meike
PS: CCing Paul since he added the link to the TODO list.
[0] http://wiki.debian.org/ProjectNews/Issues/Current
[1] http://jameswestby.net/weblog/ubuntu/04-revu.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEARECAAYFAkkkHH8ACgkQuT3KDxRRCVuZugCfUfLValzI+cdHWlWEv4Bw7vjy
ZIUAn3+m9eWX0+poYHph0J7eY5Vj8CoY
=K/r7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: