Hi,
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 04:11:41PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 12:06:42AM -0500, James McCoy a écrit :
> >
> > That being said, I don't have access to most of the packages. Even if I
> > did, it feels "dirty" to go and commit to a couple hundred packages I
> > have no involvement with instead of adapting two pieces of software to
> > deal with both path names.
>
> Hi James,
>
> you already have commit access to the Debian Med packages, like all other
> Debian developers. Please go ahead !
I take this "go ahead" for "yes, I accept the move". While I would have
no problems with this I wonder if it is appropriate to simply go on here
without at least informing Debian Science and DebiChem who also maintain
some d/upstream files. If I might have sounded against the move in the
past my main problem was that the affected parties were not included into
the decision making process.
So I have put the relevant mailing lists in CC to at least give people
lurking there some heads up and a slight chance to insist.
I would say: If nobody will insist until after the weekend we might go
ahead. And for the actual action I agree with Charles that I see no
problem if James would simply commit a change to Debian Med repositories
(SVN and Git). That's fine and would save us (me or Charles) some work
and is perfectly possible permission-wise.
Kind regards
Andreas.
PS: I think I did not got any answer to my question about further plans
for the debian/upstream/ dir. I would be really happy to understand
the big picture to make sure we will not again invent something which
needs to be changed later on.
--
http://fam-tille.de
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140212143924.ga21...@an3as.eu
