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

Re: Status of jai-imageio-core



Andreas,

On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 02:21:21PM +0200, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
>> http://mentors.debian.net/package/jai-core
>
> I have builded this package successfully.  It has a lintian warning
> about wrong DEP5 syntax which probably should be fixed.  Regarding the

will do, thanks.

> license content you mentioned that it is non-free anyway (no commercial
> use).  The fact that even the source is non-free might lead to the
> decision to not care for the availabillity of providing the source for
> the binary mlibwrapper stuff, right?

There is no source for mlibwrapper AFAIK.

> While this is no real restriction
> license wise it restricts the use of the package to only two
> architectures (i386 and amd64) which is a bit sad.  Do you see any chance
> to obtain the source code also for mlibwrapper_jai?

I did fill a bug report for that: http://java.net/jira/browse/JAI_CORE-151

> BTW, lintian informs about a missing watch file.  Do you think it would
> make sense writing?  Hint:  In jam-lib package I tried a watch file
> which reports new SVN commits - perhaps this is somehow applicable, but
> I'll leave the decision to you.

The project seems dead upstream. But anyway if it ever resurrect the
script might come handy.

> Did you contacted debian-java or was the effort to sponsor the package
> stalled why I was on vacation?

Technically this is one of those package inspected during my NM
process. But no-one from deb-java (except AM) did volunteer so far to
have a look at it.

>> http://mentors.debian.net/package/jai-imageio-core
>
> I will check once jai-core checks are finished.
>
>> If someone could test them on x86, that would be great !
>
> This question remains open.
>
> Kind regards and many thanks for working on this because it is a
> precondition for several other very interesting medical imaging stuff
> written in Java

-- 
Mathieu


Reply to: