I have updated the package(the debian dir only). The packagge is opens ource. 
Open source software can run on Windows!...remove the misconception that 
Windows software always must cost money.

Dylan



> From: brem...@debian.org
> To: borgdy...@hotmail.com
> CC: debian-mentors@lists.debian.org
> Subject: RE: RFS: dylandotnet
> Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 11:08:48 -0300
> 
> 
> I took the liberty of redirecting this reply back to the list.
> You may want to bounce  your original message to the list as well.
> In general, please direct the discussion to the list.
> 
> I'm not sure why lintian does not catch this, but your changelog needs
> work.
> 
>  - target should be debian unstable, not ubuntu.
> 
>  - Your closes line is wrong, it should not be part of the line with
>  urgency=low. 
> 
>  - Your changelog should also close a Debian ITP bug, since that is the
>  right place to have a discussion about whether a proposed package is
>  suitable for Debian.
> 
> On Sat, 14 May 2011 14:25:52 +0200, Dylan Borg <borgdy...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > My target audience is a .NET aware audience, this package contains a
> > compiler after all.
> 
> You still need to provide a description that is useful for debian users
> in general. 
> 
> > The .dlls are binary and platform independent(it is in the ECMA 335
> > spec).
> 
> OK.
> 
> > Right now the current dylan.NET compiler is only runnable on windows.
> 
> [...]
> 
> > Because the build cannot happen on Linux currently I ship the dlls
> > ready made.
> 
> Then I think you will have to target contrib rather than Debian main
> until you can build in Debian. See policy 2.2.2 for an explanation.
> 
>       http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-contrib
> 
> MS-Windows certainly counts as a non-free package ;).
> 
> > The method inners are being worked on but I wish the packaging and the
> > already completed parts to be tried on and bugs filed to me.
> 
> Do you think there is enough audience to justify uploading to Debian at
> this time?  What would this audience be?
> 
> > It does not have to do with the Dylan programming language.
> 
> Right, so please add that to your long description.
> 
> All the best,
> 
> David
> 
> 
> 
                                          

Reply via email to