Hi Ole, On 2021-11-03 13:52, Ole Streicher wrote: > Andrius Merkys <[email protected]> writes: >> problem: How would we define what is math software? What would be done >> with interdisciplinary software? For example, I maintain two packages, >> spglib and voronota, which deal with crystallography (chemistry?), but >> employ heavy math. Should I put them in debichem or debian-math? I >> believe the classification problem cannot be solved in general way, >> leading to looking for more "pragmatic" classification. > > I sometimes have this problem for Debian Astro packages, and then I > decide on whether the package is (intended to be) useful outside of > astronomy. Sometimes this is difficult; f.e. I just uploaded > "mpl-animators" which does animations with matplotlib, but this depends > on astropy for many functions which hints me that the authors focus on > astronomy (and not general) usage.
This might be a candidate for objective criterion, yes. >>> By this logic, we could push entire debian-med python packages into >>> python-team, java packages into java-team and so on... > > I really think this is a bit problematic; IMO the problem here is mainly > that we imply disjunct teams. > > Why can't a Python math package be maintained by both the Python and the > math team? > > Maintainer: Debian Math Team <...> > Uploaders: Debian Python Team <...>, me <olebole...> > > This would set a primary team (and the place in the Salsa directory > structure), but also allow the Python team to exercise required changes > as team upload. > > Probably policies and scripts should be adjusted to make use of > this. And "somehow" the Salsa permissions should match this. This suggestion gives some feed for thought. I think it should be proposed on debian-devel first to see if it is possible to adjust policies, scripts and salsa permissions accordingly. I am replying to this message instead of yours from Fri, 05 Nov 2021 14:14:35 +0100 just to cite your whole proposal. Best, Andrius
