[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Status of GDAL

> Hi,
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 12:21:46PM +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> > Il 15/07/2014 12:06, Francesco P. Lovergine ha scritto:
>> >
>> >> Due to approaching of freezing and the stop to new transitions (less
>> than two
>> >> months from now) I would suggest to move GDAL to 1.11 in main, just
>> to
>> >> avoid having certainly yet another old package in jessie as too often
>> >> usual.
>> >> Thoughts?
>>From my GIS-naive point of view I'd also be for some more agressive push
> of our low popcon packages.  May be it makes sense to work with fake-RC
> bugs to make sure packages will not move to fast from unstable to
> testing as some intermediate means.

The automatic testing removals put much pressure on our understaffed team
to fix the issues to prevent the removal. So I'm not a fan of the fake-RC
bugs idea.

I'm not sure what the benefit would be to prevent packages from migrating
from unstable to testing. Uploading with urgency=low would increase the
time from 5 to 10 days. When packages enter testing, the user exposure
increases significantly, resulting in valuable feedback. Why would we want
to delay that?

>> > from an user point of view it's a +1: several important new features
>> in
>> > 1.11, not to
>> > be missed.
>> > thanks for this.
>> I would like to get GDAL 1.11 ready for jessie, but I'm a bit short on
>> time to fully dedicted my time to it.
> I could provide the usual sponsoring to help finalising the migration
> (even
> if I'm wondering how long your DM-process is lasting ...)

The progress on my NM process is slow because I'm procrastinating on the
bad-licenses vs DFSG task. That's mostly due to my not ideal balancing of
available time and things to do for Debian, I'm currently prioritizing
packing work over other tasks.

The first two weeks of August I'll have significantly more time to
dedicate to that and other tasks.

Kind Regards,


Reply to: