Re: First GDL packages ready for upload
Hi,
thank you for the response!
On 23.06.2015 15:14, Coulais Alain wrote:
> Le 22 Juin 2015 09:01 CEST, Ole Streicher <olebole@debian.org> a écrit:
>> I prepared the first three packages that use GDL, and I will upload them
>> in the next days:
>> http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/debian-astro/packages/mpfit.git
>> http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/debian-astro/packages/coyote.git
>> http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/debian-astro/packages/idlastro.git
>
> Stupid question : would those links be long term ?
They are meant to be the base for the further Debian package
development, so they will probably be there for a while. However, I
would not guarantee that they are really long-term.
> If yes, it should be rather easy to add few lines in GDL to use
> that even for others OS ... And put it in paths under end user control.
I am not sure if I understand this correctly. What do you mean here?
> Great, I started to review, but not sure to be able to go deep in details
> in few days. In the GDL testsuite, we already have tests related to these
> packages (e.g. test_mpfit) and I also have "private" tests cases ...
Ohh! PLEASE contribute! My tests are all
poor-mans-created-from-the-docs-and-examples.
> For sure, since it is not possible to stop you on this way,
> I realize that the most useful would be to have the CMSV lib
> from Craig M. https://www.physics.wisc.edu/~craigm/idl/cmsave.html
> SAVE and RESTORE in GDL need it.
CMSVLIB has a non-free license and therefore cannot go into Debian.
> Maybe the HEALpix code might another candidate ?
Not for me. I am not a user of GDL at all. The main reason for me to
package this was to push debian-astro with a widely used package (and to
learn a bit about GDL and its current status).
However: If you think, healpix is worth to be packaged, feel free to do
it yourself. The first packages may serve as an template. And I could
review and upload the package to Debian when it is ready.
> I also have a copy of TexToIDL2.12 lib. ;-)
This is unfortunately not DFSG-free as well.
> PS: concerning the versioning, this is for me an issue.
> What can be do ? If the packages gain success, we will have
> feedbacks, and need to modify, versioning ...
For me (Debian): For Coyote and Idlastro I look into the tar resp zip
file and use the latest date which is there as the version (f.e.
2015.06.20). Mpfit has a version number hidden in mpfit.pro (currently
1.82); this may be however not unique, and so I append the date as well
(currently 1.82+2013.08.14). As long as I use the same upstream, the
version number remains.
Originating from that, I then create Debian packages with a revision
number, starting from 1. For example, the first Coyote lib will have the
full version 2015.06.20-1. If I then discover that I need to patch
something (either patching the source, or the Debian files), it gets the
-2. This all is the normal "Debian" way.
> putting tests in GDL pro (need version >= XYZ)
I would keep the package specific tests in the package. Best would be
ofcourse to convince upstream that they should provide them upstream.
And the Debian packages will have the requirement "gnudatalanguage (>=
0.9.5)", since I already discovered that the tests fail with earlier
versions.
Best regards
Ole
Reply to: