Re: Bug#722450: RFS: osmctools/0.1-1 [ITP] -- Some tools to manipulate OpenStreetMap files
Hi Andrew,
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 04:33:04PM +0200, Andrew Shadura wrote:
> > in my response to the ITP #722429. The Vcs fields in the packaging
> > above are not set and I personally would not consider sponsering of
> > packages who are not maintained in VCS. At the contrary I'm
> > explicitly offering tp sponsor Blends related packages[1] which to my
> > astonishment is heavily ignored despite people are claiming that it
> > is hard to find a sponsor...
>
> Andreas, why are you suggesting GIS team, not OSM team? OSM team seems
> to be a little bit more specific to OSM somehow.
That's a valid question. The answer is that there is some effort to
merge both teams. I just discussed this on both mailing lists and at
the Debian GIS/OSM meeting at DebConf. The rationale to merge into
Debian GIS is that the whole pkg-osm team is way smaller and not very
active (you could say MIA). You can also get some impression about my
statement when comparing the teammetrics of both teams:
Uploads:
http://blends.debian.net/liststats/uploaders_debian-gis.png
http://blends.debian.net/liststats/uploaders_pkg-osm.png
Bugs closed:
http://blends.debian.net/liststats/bugs_debian-gis.png
http://blends.debian.net/liststats/bugs_pkg-osm.png
and others (see all the images at this web URL). Moreover the split of
groups effectively adds some friction to a reasonable cooperation with
UbuntuGIS (which also includes OSM).
In short: There are pretty good chances that pkg-osm will be merged into
Debian GIS which also has several OSM tools even now (despite its not in
the name of the team). So it is reasonable to start in Debian GIS from
the beginning.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: