Namespace wise this is mostly identical to Debian, which has an older version in experimental.
Some modernization along the new version that you push for - all looks reasonable. For your back and forth about rocm vs rocm-dev. 1. thanks for following Debian for now, here less deviation will avoid some pain (and not lose gain) 2. I see it is discussed in Debian already to add rocm as kitchen sink name and we can follow then 3. If you want to have the rocm name already, it is quite short namespace wise and worth a deep "can we really without conflicting" but if you think we should and benefit a lot then the minimal delta is a"Provides: rocm" added to the one I accept now. copyright and all else looks uncontroversial - accepting -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2138850 Title: [needs-packaging] rocm: To make consumption of ROCm stack easier To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/2138850/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
