Re: PLEASE HELP WITH CTN (Was: CTN status)
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 06:25:49PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Jul 2008, Andreas Tille wrote:
>> Please help
> you wrote:
> "So, please do not remove it!"
> This explicite interest from your side lets me believe that you might
> try to work on the patches because you might have to do it anyway when
> you need CTN. Could you please state explicitely whether my assumption
> that you might work on this is right or wrong. As I said I have nearly
> no time but if I would know explicitely from our imaging experts that they
> will not spend their time in working on the patch I might somehow try
> this. But I have not the slightest chance to test this stuff - I can
> only see whether it compiles or not.
> Please if you regard yourself as an medical imaging expert either try
> to work on it or say explicitely "No, I can't do this for the moment."
> This would be at least a clear information - just staying silent is
> not helpful.
You're right -- I'm sorry. I was following the discussion about CTN, but
I'm in the final phase of my PhD project and external forces reduce my
spare time dramatically. Additionally, I will be traveling from next
week till the middle of August and have to wrap some things up in
advance. But anyway, you're right that something has to be done.
IIRC the situation is this:
* CTN mysql stuff is broken, since a long time. So, apparently those
people who have it installed do not need it.
* Nothing rdepends on ctn or ctn-dev, except for debian-med meta
packages or ctn itself.
* We know that at least dicomnifti and ctsim build-depend on ctn-dev.
Is there a qick way (similar to `apt-cache rdepends ctn-dev`) to
determines additional build-rdeps?
* At least one individual offered to work on fixing the mysql stuff
(don't have URL handy now, but it was posted recently).
* Popcon ctn: approx. 120 since about one year (much less before)
ctn-dev: just a few machines
* CTN is dead upstream.
(please correct me if any of the above is wrong).
I have no clue what ctn as a whole can do and I have never touched the
database parts. If nobody else steps up, I'd offer to strip ctn down to
the pieces required by other packages (ctsim and dicomnifti). The will
probably lead to a minimal libctn-dev package.
Is this something we agree on?
GPG key: 1024D/3144BE0F Michael Hanke