(sorry for the top post, damn you gmail, damn you) Well, I think we're all agreeing that the proper fix would be to package gems individually into the archive, but this isn't a minor project, so we should collaborate with Debian Ruby to determine the best course of action. Michael
On Thu, 2008-08-28 at 00:37 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Thursday 28 August 2008 00:04, Justin Dugger wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 10:22 PM, Michael Casadevall > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > +1 on reverting this upload until a consensus among -motu and -devel > > > can be reached. > > > > Even putting aside the rookie packaging errors, there appears to be a > > serious technical problem here (and a bit of pathology from Debian > > too). The idea about finding a consensus thus far has not mentioned > > upstream itself, nor has any of the bugs about this issue I've seen. > > It would be handy if someone were to document whatever discussion and > > decisions upstream has made, if this is truly about collaboration > > between Ubuntu, Debian and upstream. > > > > Justin Dugger > > At this point I'd like to start with getting some consensus within Ubuntu. I > totally don't understand what you mean by pathology from Debian? Surely > we've done enough disrespecting our upstream without adding on to it. > > Scott K > -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
