Re: [DebianGIS] [Fwd: Re: Hijack or remove postgis]
the requirements from joerg of having a static control file, and your
proposition to have only one postgis-utils have been full filled.
the whole list is in the debian changelog.
you have recently promissed to review thew package again, so please do
it and be strait to the point in your criticism.
alex
Stephen Frost wrote:
> * alex bodnaru (alexbodn@012.net.il) wrote:
>
>>it would really be good on your side to check the package again, since
>>it has fixed a lot of issues, part of them from you.
>
>
> Is what's in the Debian-GIS CVS repo any different from what you're
> proposing? That's what I looked at most recently and I havn't seen
> updates to it or anything suggesting there's a newer version than what's
> in there.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Stephen
>
>
>>Stephen Frost wrote:
>>
>>>* 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,
>>>
>>> Stephe
>
> n
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pkg-grass-general mailing list
> Pkg-grass-general@lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-general
Reply to: