On Feb 11, 2011, at 06:45 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote: >On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 16:40, Barry Warsaw <ba...@python.org> wrote: >> For Debian, we'd simply take those two separate source packages and split the >> binary packages among them as appropriate. > >excuse me? I don't like this solution, or are you going to do all the >work in Debian to adapt to this proposal?
I would of course take on the work to do the packaging and propose it to the Debian maintainers. >You have a problem in ubuntu? fix it there: take the full numpy >upstream tarball, rename it in numpy-doc, build only the doc, ship it >where it better fits for ubuntu policies, work done & no-one gets hurt >:) Colin Watson suggested exactly this. It would still mean that Ubuntu and Debian would diverge though, which I'd think everyone would like to avoid. >> A split >> tarball approach from upstream would be easier to get into Debian, and thus >> keep us in sync. > >ehm... you're speaking too fast here and without involving maintainers it >seems. Right, I didn't mean to speak for Debian, but was looking for a solution that is feasible and acceptable to upstream too. It's a complex stack to manage, and I wanted to get upstream's opinion first, since "it ain't broke" in Debian. -Barry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
