Re: Should non-science packages needed by science packages be maintained by Debian Science?

2015-03-19 Thread Doug Torrance
On 03/19/2015 10:05 AM, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: On Thu, 19 Mar 2015, Andreas Tille wrote: Usually predependencies are created by those people who are interested in the final package. If the final package is maintained by Debian Science I'd call it perfectly consequently that Debian Science a

Re: Should non-science packages needed by science packages be maintained by Debian Science?

2015-03-19 Thread Yaroslav Halchenko
On Thu, 19 Mar 2015, Andreas Tille wrote: > thanks for working on these math packages. +1 > > Would it be appropriate for Debian Science to maintain memtailor, or > > should I just maintain itself? Theoretically, it could be a dependency > > for some future non-science package. > Usually pr

Re: Should non-science packages needed by science packages be maintained by Debian Science?

2015-03-19 Thread Andreas Tille
Hi Douglas, On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 01:15:42PM +, Torrance, Douglas wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I'm in the process of packaging memtailor [1], a C++ memory allocation > library which will be a Build-Depends of macaulay2 and mathic, two math > packages which ultimately will be maintained by De

Should non-science packages needed by science packages be maintained by Debian Science?

2015-03-19 Thread Torrance, Douglas
Hi everyone, I'm in the process of packaging memtailor [1], a C++ memory allocation library which will be a Build-Depends of macaulay2 and mathic, two math packages which ultimately will be maintained by Debian Science. Would it be appropriate for Debian Science to maintain memtailor, or shoul