Re: LJPEG 62.1 release ! (was Re: [med-svn] r2712 - trunk/packages/gdcm/trunk/debian (jpeg))
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 10:14 PM, Andreas Tille <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
>>> Let see if the community has any interest in this package. There are a
>>> couple of gray areas remaining:
>>> - should I keep the version number 62 (aka 6b) from IJG or will this
>>> confuse people ?
> The version number should be different from the other libjpeg inside
Just to double check you understand that I call the package "libljpeg"
so that it does not conflict with "libjpeg". The reason I kep the 62
notation is so that people are aware the patch was applied against the
official ijg release 62, and not the one from guido's 6c release.
>>> - I have a couple of patch in the gdcm/jpeg that have not been
>>> applied. It concern broken JPEG implementation and have not been seen
>>> outside of the DICOM world.
> I have no idea in how far these patches make sense for general use outside
> Debian - than they should be included into the tarball (under a new version,
> because it is just a new upstream version). If they only are useful for
> specific Debian package they should be applied using quilt or dpatch.
So far the package is very minimalist and only contains :
- ijg 6b
- lossless patch
it does not contains non of the gdcm's patch. I'll work on that; once
I see positive response from a DD to handle the package. This
duplicate my work from the gdcm package, so I'd prefer not waste my
time for a doomed package.
>> I forgot to mention, the debian/* files are not shipped with the
>> tarball and can be found instead at:
> This is really great. I think I just elaborated about debian files in
> upstream tarball - thanks for this sane decision.
> Any volunteers to build an official Debian package from it to proceed
> with the dicom issues?
> Kind regards and thanks for your fine work
As a side note what does it takes to becomes a DD ? I guess there
should be some info on the web, I'll check on that.