Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org> writes: > I'm always all for improving things. I just don't see it as right > solution to break stuff and expectations. If one wants to improve > policy, IMHO the way to go is to send out a mail like "possible > improvements to policy". (And, BTW, I *definitly* don't like to repeat a > discussion we already had at debconf - I'm a strong believer in the "each > discussion only once"-approach. :) As the DebConf dicussion did not gathered all python maintainers, and as no real report of your discussion was dropped here, and as you are considering such discussions closed subjects while other python maintainers may wish to comment on, and as piman had so much pain to get information out of the participants, all you said here *IS* null, and the policy cannot be considered approved yet. I'm waiting for joss and buxy, which are in the way of solving all this correctly. As dh_python generated bad dependencies, and the first upload of the new cdbs class had mistakes too, we should consider a new start of the transition as soon as fixed tools are uploaded. -- Marc Dequènes (Duck)
Attachment:
pgpZG3G0dBDl7.pgp
Description: PGP signature