On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, David Bremner wrote:
Well, perhaps, but:
- This is the naming convention suggested by the alioth guidelines
on the wiki[1], however authorative those are. Mind you, this is
a bit self referential, since these are the guidelines for
"packaging projects"
Which is exactly my point: I would love to see the Debian-Science
effort to be _more_ than a packaging project. Packaging software
is one important part but it needs more than adding single packages
to the Debian pool to make Debian really attractive for scientists.
I'm speaking from my own experience with the Debian-Med project that
evolved from a one-ma-project taking over some biomedicine packages
that were available in Debian and adding some more to a group that
on the one hand adds more and more packages to the pool, but in
addition:
- cares for QA issues of the related packages by developping
useful QA tools
- works together to convince upstream to use free licenses
- argues with authors of scientific software to reduce the
number of forks
- takes part in conferences and reports about this effort
- etc.
Isn't it science to see the whole picture instead of only tiny
bits (like single packages)?
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de