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

Re: RFS: VLFeat computer vision library



Hi Dima,

thanks for your patience - Alioth is up and running now again.

On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 10:49:46AM -0800, Dima Kogan wrote:
> Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> writes:
> 
> > Hi Dima,
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 11:10:54PM -0800, Dima Kogan wrote:
> >> > 2013/11/8 Dima Kogan <dima@secretsauce.net>:
> >> >> Hi all.
> >> >>
> >> >> I packaged VLFeat (http://vlfeat.org), and am looking for sponsorship.
> >> >
> >> > Anton Gladky <gladky.anton@gmail.com> writes:
> >> >
> >> > Hi Dima, I will be glad to review/upload this package.
> >> > But i can do it only on weekends.
> >> 
> >> Thank you very much, Anton. There is no rush, so please take your time.
> >
> > Is your work in Debian Science VCS?
> 
> Yes:
> 
>  http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=debian-science/packages/vlfeat.git

I checked this out and have noticed in debian/README.source:

  "The SIFT implementation was removed from the source ..."

That's OK, but if you change the upstream source you should either
provide

   a) get-orig-source target in d/rules
   b) specify Files-Excluded in d/copyright and use the enhanced
      uscan described here:

         https://wiki.debian.org/UscanEnhancements

I personally recommend the latter since it is more simple to implement
and from my personal point of view more transparent.
 
> > In what Debian Science task would this library fit best?
> 
> The "image analysis" task sounds most appropriate to me.

I added

   Suggests: libvlfeat-dev

since we usually link to user applications in non-dev metapackages.  It might
make sense to consider an imageanalysis-dev metapackage since the task now
is assembling several lib*-dev packages that way.  What do you think?

Is there any chance to also create a vlfeat-{tools,utils} package with a
plain user application for demonstarting the library?
 
Feel free to add your package to the SoB Wiki page.

Kind regards

       Andreas.

-- 
http://fam-tille.de


Reply to: