Re: Should non-science packages needed by science packages be maintained by Debian Science?
On Thu, 19 Mar 2015, Andreas Tille wrote:
> thanks for working on these math packages.
+1
> > Would it be appropriate for Debian Science to maintain memtailor, or
> > should I just maintain itself? Theoretically, it could be a dependency
> > for some future non-science package.
> Usually predependencies are created by those people who are interested
> in the final package. If the final package is maintained by Debian
> Science I'd call it perfectly consequently that Debian Science also
> maintains its predepends. We have several examples for this and so
> the short answer to your question is "yes".
+1
moreover, at times it would even be desired and recommended. This way
it would be easier to guarantee that version/progression of those core
packages would be tailored to the target leaf science software, not some
e.g. Desktop app like it would be in the case if the predepency is
maintained by the Desktop-all team ;)
--
Yaroslav O. Halchenko, Ph.D.
http://neuro.debian.net http://www.pymvpa.org http://www.fail2ban.org
Research Scientist, Psychological and Brain Sciences Dept.
Dartmouth College, 419 Moore Hall, Hinman Box 6207, Hanover, NH 03755
Phone: +1 (603) 646-9834 Fax: +1 (603) 646-1419
WWW: http://www.linkedin.com/in/yarik
Reply to: