[Bug 274820] Re: Sugar feature freeze exception

[Jonas Smedegaard]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

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?


Kind regards,

  - Jonas

- -- 
* 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)

iEYEARECAAYFAkjeQRQACgkQn7DbMsAkQLhtzgCfSjSTm2wmMiZ1/vP4LvjLdowy
/sAAoIbXlgW6UQzo16paKJyQBia1G7mr
=zgjE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----