* alex bodnaru (alexbodn@012.net.il) wrote: > i wish to make a distinction between the postgis package currently in > sid, which is currently candidate to be removed (and i personally agree > on that), and the newer postgis package currently on debian-giswhich has > all comments fixed, and it's about to be re-proposed on new. Unless what's on Debian-GIS has changed recently, it's still got alot of issues. I suppose I can go through and point them all out (such as including some of the scripts already in postgresql-common and having an obscene number of binary packages for a simple Postgres module) but, honestly, the packaging is just way more complex than it has any need to be. It tries to do way too much and ends up not being very good at doing the basics and ends up being very fragile. Thanks, Stephen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature