Re: otb_4.2.1-1_amd64.changes is NEW
Hi Johan,
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 09:02:00AM +0200, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
> Why did you upload to experimental instead of unstable?
I did upload to experimental since Paolo suggested to do so. :-)
> I would count on approximately one week of queuing in the new queue
> (they have been processing quick recently), but you never know.
>
> Any package in good shape in unstable before 24/10 will be imported
> in jessie. So if you want to be in jessie you will have to upload to
> unstable later (processing will go quick if your package is already in
> experimental).
I (perhaps wrongly) assumed that Paolo did not considered the package
ripe for the next stable release since it is quie untested. So if my
interpretation of his suggestion was wrong, we have two options: Either
reupload targeting at unstable into the new queue or trying to be very
quick with an upload to unstable once it has hit experimental.
I'm personally not convinced that it is a good idea to hurry up so much.
We should probably consider migrating from experimental to unstable
before the next Ubuntu sync from unstable. As far as I see most GIS
people are using the fruits of our work via the Ubuntu detour anyway
(even if I hope we can change this if we continue the good work we did
in 2014). If a well tested OTB, perhaps with additional applications
using OTB will make it into Jessie+1 and people might be able to use
some backports meanwhile no real harm is done if we do not reach Jessie
(IMHO).
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: