Re: question on Tasks usage
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 05:40:33PM +0100, Olivier Sallou wrote:
> Thanks for your answer.
> In fact I do not have "urgent" need for ngs tasks, this was an example
> to understand behavior.
OK. So my example to install the metapackage was hopefully helpful.
BTW, I considered the building of new metapackages for unstable anyway
in the next couple of weeks to continue the release cycle. I just
wanted to let the packages we created in travemünde into unstable as
well (so specifically biomaj will show up in med-bio).
> Regarding your previous email refered in this one, this is true that
> biology and med could be splitted in different blends (even tough some
> guys in medecin work with biology stuff in research departements), but
> this could
> be misleading now with all existing references etc... on debian-med that
> would not be up-to-date anymore...
Well, the Blends philosophy enables you to install several metapackages
of different Blends. There should be no conflict by definition because
you are just installing packages. So having a Debian Bio Blend in
addition to a Debian Med Blend would neither harm anybody nor stop the
strong connection we are currently celebrating. I'm just concerned
about the extra work (web pages docs etc.) is worth the effort so I'm
not really keen on splitting just because we have some trouble in
classifying packages. I simply do not know what might be the best
solution.
> Maybe we could define a roadmap for this kind of classification that
> could be reviewed/updated on regular basis upon users/developpers
> requests ?
Well, I as an outsider (physicist) are basically acting on request. But
there was no detailed request. Creating bio-ngs was just a quick shot /
experiment after a request which was not thought to a real end. We now
have some intermediate state without a final decision.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: