On Dec 17, 2012, at 07:52 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote: >UDD is not mature or reliable enough to be presented to new users as "the" >way to do packaging for Ubuntu. I think the current guide is fatally flawed >as is.
Yes, it's frustrating when you need to work on a package that has import failures, and yes, I wish we had more cycles to devote to fixing this, but the majority of packages import just fine, and UDD (IMHO and YMMV) has enormous benefits which outweigh those frustrations. Of course, I'm not saying that traditional packaging shouldn't also be described. -Barry -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
