On 2009-08-04 18:50 +0200, Peter S Galbraith wrote: > I wonder about the following: > > : There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the > : override file for the following file(s): > : > : debian-el_30.3-1_all.deb: package says section is utils, override says lisp. > : devscripts-el_30.3-1_all.deb: package says section is editors, override > says lisp. > : dpkg-dev-el_30.3-1_all.deb: package says section is utils, override says > lisp. > : emacs-goodies-el_30.3-1_all.deb: package says section is editors, override > says lisp. > : gnus-bonus-el_30.3-1_all.deb: package says section is news, override says > lisp. > : vm-bonus-el_30.3-1_all.deb: package says section is mail, override says > lisp. > > Sure, the packages are written in lisp. But does the user care what > programming language is used? The packages are not there to help > program in lisp, they are there for reasons like assisting mail reading, > news reading, editing, etc. > > Where does the inclination to classify all Emacs add-ons in section > lisp come from? Should we?
It is coming from the FTP masters who in March declared the new archive sections[1]. In their wisdom, they decided that every package whose name happens to end in -el has to go to section lisp. There have been some successful protests of maintainers of Greek language packs who found their package unwittingly going to that section, but Emacs add-on package maintainers apparently have to give in. In any case, you have to discuss this with the FTP masters if you want to see it changed. Sven 1. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2009/03/msg00010.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-emacsen-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
