Am Dienstag, den 27.01.2009, 11:26 -0800 schrieb Don Armstrong: [..] > Since it wasn't discussed on -policy > or -project or -science, it quite clearly has domain relevance only > for the debian-science alioth project.[1]
Sorry, but I disagree. This might be clear for all those, who contribute to "Debian Science". It is not clear for people getting to know "Debian Science". For those the document IMO is misleading. > I think everyone is in violent agreement with this; what's left is the > relatively minor concern of a misleading document, which can best be > dealt with by submitting a patch to change the proposed document, > instead of the continuation of this thread on this mailing list. This was IMO the best place for the topic. [..] > I, for one, am glad that people in the debian-science alioth project > are taking steps to adopt a consitent policy for the packages that > they happen to maintain as a group. The repository IMO was created to pick up developers. It is IMHO the place (in all existing projects and teams), which has the most potential to *not* being team-maintained. That's simply caused by its nature (to be a place to pick up *various* developers for *various* scientific fields). To be honest: debian-science is probably the worst place for recommendations of packaging tools over other packaging tools, because here you will probably find the largest variety of workflows in the whole area of places, where scientific software packaging is done. Regards, Daniel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
