[Bug 274820] Re: Sugar feature freeze exception
dr at jones.dk
Sat Sep 27 15:20:05 BST 2008
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 01:54:44PM -0000, Jani Monoses wrote:
>While I unfortunately do not have time for sugar packaging, a sync from
>Debian would be beneficial so we're in line with them and current
>upstream. Morgan may not be an uploader he is involved in upstream
>Sugar and represents their PoV, and knows better than me why these
>changes are better than staying with current packaging.
>I will sponsor any debdiff they produce to fix up possible divergences
>with Debian packaging.
>Morgan if there are extra Conflicts or Replaces fields to be added do
>you think Debian devs can be asked to add them even though they mention
>Ubuntu only packages?
Hi, I maintain the Sugar packages for Debian. I am also subscribed here
(but may not notice all traffic, so feel free to cc as needed)
I dislike "unofficial" (read: non-Debian) dependencies cluttering the
official Debian packages. This is not to "annoy Ubuntu" - I apply same
rules to my own non-Debian rereleasing of some packages. It is simply
that I want the package maintainance to be as simple as possible.
(this does not imply that I wnat the whole packaging simplest possible -
and indeed the Sugar packages are relatively complex in other aspects
than common maintainance tasks)
Is it a problem to maintain Ubuntu-specific Conflicts and Replaces in a
Ubuntu-only patch? And if so, is the problem technical or political?
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Ubuntu-sugarteam