Regarding the number of replies and the will to do something on this, we could do something on this! > I'd also like to help. To also address my concerns on the name: As > Andreas already said, I also think naming discussions tend to go > nowhere. BUT in this case, I'd really prefer "debian-science" as a name > since I was totally confused about the different "subprojects" as a > user; I also know users who have troubles to get it right. Since most > users already know the debian-science mailing list, their first guess is > a debian-science packaging group under the same name, that does not > exists. I like Sylvestre's pkg-science effort but IMHO Debian is not > about packaging from a user's point of view, and users is what Debian is > for. ("debian-science" is a more user-friendly name, even if it's "just" > about packaging, so to speak. The pkg-* namespace is OK for packages but > IMHO not for a group addressing a certain task.) I agree with you. debian-science is a good and more general name! > So I did not see a consensus on what needs to be done: Should we start a > new debian-science project on Alioth and move stuff there? I'm not quite > sure if I got the overall plan right and where help is needed... :-/ I contacted alioth admins to see if pkg-science can be renamed. Sylvestre
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=