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

Re: Debian Science Policy

Am Dienstag, den 27.01.2009, 14:01 +0100 schrieb Daniel Leidert:
> Do you mean: debian-science.alioth.d.o == "Debian Science"? Are you
> kidding me? Please get serious.

No, I did not mean that. The former is a packaging effort and just a
part of the later.

> It is maybe a place to pickup packages/developers not fitting into
> existing groups or don't wanting to join existing groups. It is not
> "Debian Science". It is a small packaging repository - one out of
> several.

Agreed. And this packaging repository is what the policy document was
targeted at. For this repository and nothing more. If this was stated
otherwise, that was just wrong and not intended. I'm sorry if that was
the case!

> The document doesn't title itself as a packaging guideline only
> applicable to debian-science.alioth.d.o. So your claim, that it can be
> compared to the debian-med policy is wrong.

I agree that the wording can be improved and will provide a patch if
this is a way to resolve this dispute.

> Can you please point me to the RFC? The time I missed to answer, it was
> IIRC promoted as "Debian Science Policy", not as a draft for discussion.

http://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2008/05/msg00217.html and the
messages followed by that. All feedback was included into the document.

> Can you please point me to the discussion? Why does the list description
> doesn't reflect, that this is considered a "user list"? Why are still
> most topics related to packaging and to coordinate where to put
> packages? I'm curious about your statement.

I guess it was somewhere around 


or a later message, when the packaging effort part of Debian Science
formed. I did not re-read the thread, I just got the reference from
memory. Anyway, I really do not see why it makes a difference where
packaging issues are discussed, as long as they are discussed. The
intend was not to drive users away from debian-science because it
becomes full of technical discussion and BTS mails.

> You've put your personal packaging preferences in a document titled with
> "Debian Science Policy". Fact.

I offered it for discussion and always had the Debian Science packaging
effort on Alioth in mind. I'm sorry that the wording is not optimal and
we had a misunderstanding because of that. This will be fixed. And I'd
appreciate it if you'd help me here by exactly stating what bothers you
here. As I understand it, it's just the wording, right?

Best regards

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil

Reply to: