On Wed, 11 Jan 2017, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 11:22 -0500, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > > Hi Ghislain,
> > Thanks for packaging and uploading to dcm2niix! > You're welcome. > > It is a pity though that we duplicated the effort somewhat since > > we maintained dcm2niix within NeuroDebian for a while and didn't upload > > primarily due to some licensing issues we brought up with upstream and > > which were later resolved (e.g. of console/ujpeg.*) > Before packaging a piece of software for Debian, I systematically check > whether an ITP has already been filed for it on the Debian BTS. There > was none, so I went for it. The duplication is a pity, but I can't be > blamed for following the standard procedure for contributing a new > package to the archive. ;) oh -- it wasn't my intend to blame anyone. Indeed, if to blame we could blame us (NeuroDebian) since indeed I don't think we ever filed an ITP for this one > > It would be nice to converge and co-maintain a single package, may be > > under some team, e.g our pkg-exppsy (neurodebian) team or debian-med -- > > whatever you would prefer > I believe the package should be maintained by the Debian Med Team, and > subsequently backported to Debian Stable and Ubuntu LTS by NeuroDebian, > if desirable. The primary source for derivative projects should remain > Debian. sure > > our packaging is present on alioth and github: > > git://git.debian.org/git/pkg-exppsy/dcm2niix.git > > https://github.com/neurodebian/dcm2niix > Ack. > > unfortunately there is a stumbling stone on our end also -- versioning > > since upstream was inconsistent and I was naive to switch from our > > custom 0.0.date to their 'date' scheme they took for earlier > > releases, and now they have switched to 1.0.date ... heh > Ack. > You are referring to the following issue [1], right? > [1] https://github.com/rordenlab/dcm2niix/issues/28 I guess ;) > > correct resolution, to account for poor us NeuroDebianoids would be to > > introduce an epoch making it 1:1.0.20161101 so currently present > > version in neurodebian (20160921+git16-g0339407-1~nd+1) would upgrade to > > it. > > What do you think? ;) > Well, do I really have a choice? ;) now that you are the authority over the Debian's dcm2niix package -- more than ever ;) > An alternative solution could be to convince Chris to revert to the old > YYYYMMDD versioning scheme. This way both the Debian and NeuroDebian > packages can be upgraded without such hack. He is about to make a new > release so we should act fast. indeed! I will gently follow up on the https://github.com/rordenlab/dcm2niix/issues/28 now -- Yaroslav O. Halchenko Center for Open Neuroscience http://centerforopenneuroscience.org Dartmouth College, 419 Moore Hall, Hinman Box 6207, Hanover, NH 03755 Phone: +1 (603) 646-9834 Fax: +1 (603) 646-1419 WWW: http://www.linkedin.com/in/yarik
