> https://github.com/openaps/openaps > > to assemble a bunch of off-the shelf components to establish a feedback > loop to control blood sugar levels. > > Their philosophy is that to comply with FDA regulations the device > should not be sold, it is up to the individuals and their parents to > establish it all, on their very own responsibility this means. > > I am tempted to just go and package it.
+1 > At the same time, any stupid > problem with anything (not necessarily within OpenAPS itself) could have > severe consequences, which includes death or brain damage. On the other > hand, especially the continuous integration checking of Debian is > helpful to spot some library inconsistencies upfront. There is also the > possibility to only offer the package in unstable (with an artificial RC > bug to prevent a migration to testing), +1 > so we could for instance offer > the continuous integration only and motivate the development of > respective tests by the community and see how things develop. > > So, how do you feel? Should we duck or cover it? Maybe one could add a fake alternative "openaps" which is set to /bin/false and must be set to /usr/bin/openaps-whatever manually by the user ? On every upgrade debconf could be used to force the user to re-decide whether it should stay active, default to inactive. Karsten
