Re: Bio-Linux
Hi William
On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 07:50:12PM +0100, William McCaffery wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If we were to create a new task within deb-med, would I be correct in saying
> that I would have to:
>
> -file a WNPP bug report,
This is only needed for new source packages. As long as you stick to
debian-med source package there is no need for a WNPP bug.
> -Create a new task in Debian med in the blends repository
Yes.
> -Add to this task all packages currently in Bio-Linux even if they aren't
> currently packaged in sid so that if they are added in the future the
> package will work with them without having to update it.
Yes.
> When it's said that we're basing this package on med-bio & med-bio-dev, does
> this mean we would be taking the existing tasks for each, merging them,
> removing unnecessary packages, then adding the Bio-Linux packages that were
> recently added to sid?
I guess you have the least work if you just copy tasks/bio delete what you
do not want and add what's missing.
> Would we also include packages not in sid, but ones
> that would be considered useful for Bio-Linux, so that we would not have to
> update the meta-package again when the packages are added in the future?
Just add what *should* be inside. The metapackages need to be re-rendered
but that should be no issue.
> In regards to the suggestion of a separate source package, what would that
> involve? Personally I don't think that having the name med-bio-linux-desktop
> would be an issue, since, as far as I'm aware the package will be mainly
> distributed from within the bio-linux iso, through download, usb and cd.
So my suggestion is to stick to the debian-med source package since
that's the more simple approach. In case you might decide otherwise
later I'd volunteer to do some work (which is faster done myself than
drafting a long explanation.
> Thanks,
You are welcome
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: