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

Re: bringing sfcgal support to postgis


thanks for bringing this to my attention.

On 09/03/2015 06:05 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
We can take a similar control template approach as qgis does for its
supported distributions for example. Or maintain separate packaging
branches for Debian & pgApt in git. I prefer the latter.

I'm a bit afraid of mismatches between the two, if we split into different branches. For users of PgApt, it shouldn't matter whether they got the package from Debian or PgApt. That's a lot easier to guarantee, if the two are built from the same set of source files.

Apart from that, what problem would git branches really solve? AFAIK there's no way to force generation of a control file *before* its Build-Dependencies are processed (in Debian proper). To have a git branch that matches what's uploaded, we therefore commit the debian/control file for the sid variant - even though it's auto-generated (meaning something you usually shouldn't commit). AFAIU the PgApt case, the 'clean' target (or maybe just the debian/control one) is executed before evaluating B-Ds, which allows us to generate (and override) debian/control, there.

I'm very open to discuss changes to *how* we generate the control file. (To the point that we'd actually maintain a control file for each distribution and the "generation" would then barely consist of copying the right file in place.)

The qgis variant looks interesting, however, I couldn't figure how to actually generate the control file.

Kind Regards

Markus Wanner

BTW: I didn't see the patch from the OP, as I'm not on debian-gis, just pkg-grass-devel.

Reply to: