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

Re: petsc_2.3.0-1_i386.changes REJECTED



Adam C Powell IV wrote:
> As you could see in my message, I did ask Joerg again, but with no reply
> for a week, so nobody but Joerg knows what I did or didn't convince him
> of.
Well, I'm not Joerg, but based on the evidence of rejects/accepts and my
understanding of policy and actual practices, it is my understanding that
- the meta packages probably are the main rejection cause,
- parallel installability of -dev-Packages is not an issue Debian cares
  about except for the most popular packages,
- (this doesn't directly relate to the rejection, but nonetheless) the
  use of the alternatives system is probably a bad idea because it
  leads to unexpected compilation results (essentially many developers
  considere it a bug for a package build to produce substantially
  different builds when run on arbitrarily chosen current unstable
  systems),
- versioned -dev package naming is not Joerg's preference, but when I
  asked him about a rejection of libfoo12-dev and pointed out Junichi's
  libpkg-guide recommendation he said he wouldn't reject for this in
  the future.

Kind regards

T.

P.S.: Should we move elsewhere from -release?
-- 
Thomas Viehmann, http://thomas.viehmann.net/



Reply to: