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?=