Re: debian imagej

[Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de>]

On Thu, 30 Apr 2009, Johan Henriksson wrote:

> >   $ apt-cache search fiji
> >
> > Sorry, I can not get what package you mean?
>
> indeed, this is the next problem. they have their own server for debian
> packages:
>
> http://pacific.mpi-cbg.de/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

So this is not *our* business for the moment.  We just deal with official
Debian packages.

> question is if they would prefer to upload their packages straight to
> debian or if our imagej package should use fiji as the source package
> and take over the debian port.

I admit I always get parts of the information in your mails.  We
have no *port* of imagej - we just distribute imagej as is (with
ome patches only if needed).

Before we package *just* another clone of a yet existing program - sorry,
I see no information whether it is a fork (what means "Fiji is an image
processing package based on ImageJ.") what are the differences,  what
are the reasons of a fork (if it is really a fork and not something else)?
How good are chances that the fork will better maintained than the
original?  In how far fits Fiji better into Debian than ImageJ? etc.

So it definitely needs some clarification before we blindly put two
competing projects on our shoulders if even one of them seems to be
not very well maintained (from our side because there seems to be a
lack of man power).

BTW, Fiji maintainers can not upload "straight" to Debian.  They at
least need to find a sponsor (well, I'd volunteer as I did for ImageJ)
or they need to become Debian maintainers.  Just to clarify this.
If you find an e-mail address of the Fiji authors it might be reasonable
to involve them into this thread to answer my (probably very uneducated
questions).

Kind regards

       Andreas.

--
http://fam-tille.de