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

Re: More packages: PVRG & dicom3tools



On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de> wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2008, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
>> Full ref:
>> http://apps.sourceforge.net/mediawiki/jpeg/index.php?title=Pvrg
>>
>>> Is this targetted at collab-maint?
>>
>> I am fine with all options.
>
> I'm quite relaxed in which repo a package might end up.  The VCS
> tags - if properly set - will inform every user about the location
> of the packaging stuff.  I'm in big favour of using a mailing list
> *which* *cares* as the maintainer address.  So if the package would
> be moved to collab-maint we should at least put
> debian-med-packaging@lists.alioth.debian.org as the maintainer (and
> Mathieu and the sponsor who uploads the package as Uploaders) to
> make sure that problems in the package go to the location where
> somebody is able to care (for instance if Mathieu is on vacation or
> something like that).  In principle I have no problem to also move
> preconditions for medical packages in Debian Med SVN but I have
> no strong opinion about this.  I have only a strong opinion on
> not leaving packages bit rot in a anonymous collab-maint trash bin.

Applied:

http://jpeg.svn.sf.net/viewvc/jpeg/pvrg/debian/control?r1=79&r2=85

>>> Also, why is the debian
>>> directory apparently in the upstream subversion repository?
>>
>> Why not ? I am doing it with the gdcm project and debian-med people
>> are fine with it, since the official tarball do not contains the
>> debian/* files (there is a cmake rule to skip this particular dir).
>> I am not comfortable with the debian process, so for the small
>> organization I am working for, we use directly the svn repository to
>> build the debian package and install it on remote station. I guess
>> when the official gdcm/debian package will be out, this would not make
>> much sense, but meanwhile, I really would like to keep it this way.
>
> Well, Michael is refering to the fact that we really like to have
> an upstream source tarball without a debian directory.

I clearly understood that, sorry this was not clear from my very first post.

I'll work a little bit more and make sure the get-orig-source retrieve
the original src code, instead of my already-patch version (fix
compilation + bugs).

I'll resubmit to debian-med once this is cleaned'up.

Thanks & regards
-- 
Mathieu


Reply to: