On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, David Paleino wrote:
Significant increase in workload for a number of people due to 'what if
a random...'
What's wrong in:
Probably upstream should be educated on a better usage of this, [..]
? :)
It is actually one part of beeing a Debian Maintainer.
Maybe I'm
On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, David Paleino wrote:
Bad idea, DevRef ยง6.3.4 incourages use of debian/NEWS only for important
changes to the package.
Yes.
In this case, I'd opt for adding that note in the long description of odin, as
suggested by Jan Beyer on IRC.
Sounds good
Andreas.
--
On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, Michael Hanke wrote:
If we are honest, this kind of package will never have a popcon stat
with three digits (simply because it is very very very special
interest). Having it (IMHO) overengineered will cause an unreasonable
workload on some project members -- with close to no
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 03:42:31PM +0100, Hilbert, Sebastian wrote:
We have seen some general practioner projects being started because GNUmed
was 'just not right'. In the end all projects died because it is not easy to
catch up with a head start and thousands of lines of codes from other
Hi David,
besides being reminded that I need to take my routine check these days, I'd
like to stress
how unique your position is, David. You should not spend too much time on
coding. Rather
help with some insightful guidance to specify the minimal complexity of a
system that
could be
I'd like to stress how unique your position is, David. You should not spend
too much
time on coding.
I fully agree with that.
Rather help with some insightful guidance to specify the minimal complexity
of a
system that could be considered useful. Publish that somewhere. Indicate what
is
Karsten Hilbert wrote:
I'd like to stress how unique your position is, David. You should not spend
too much
time on coding.
I fully agree with that.
Rather help with some insightful guidance to specify the minimal complexity
of a
system that could be considered useful. Publish
I can only agree here. I think the remedy to this problem is to split up
the work into smaller manageable pieces that are of greater interest to
the community because they can be shared. this all boils down to knowing
project/design politics. examples:
viewing pictures: done. can you extend
Hi Johan,
Johan Henriksson wrote:
Karsten Hilbert wrote:
I'd like to stress how unique your position is, David. You should not spend
too much
time on coding.
I fully agree with that.
Rather help with some insightful guidance to specify the minimal complexity
of a
system that
Usually a professor's interest in a project lives only as long as
funding flows.
I need to contradict here. If you are not interested int the work, then
you are not
interested in the work, be there funding flowing or not. You are claiming
that the
interest may only go where the money is.
special rendering: fork a library if possible, data visualization is
always in need
Forking is likely not a good idea.
sorry, need to get my terminology straight; split off a library
Likely already done several times. Doing DICOM is not as trivial as it sounds.
managing dialogs
11 matches
Mail list logo
