Sandro Tosi <mo...@debian.org> wrote: >On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 16:43, Scott Kitterman <deb...@kitterman.com> >wrote: >> I think it's deeply unfortunate that the pkgme authors chose >duplicate >> something for which there is already a reasonably complete solution >rather >> than focus on areas where that was not the case or improving the >existing >> solution. > >ehm, isn't this exactly the python-support/dh_python2 critics?
It's similar, but in that case there were two existing implementations, neither of which were fully satisfactory, nor were they likely to become so. A fresh implementation was necessary to break a technical and social logjam. I recognize that not everyone shares this view (and I don't see a point in re-arguing it), but I think the similarity is only superficial. Scott K
