Hi Yaroslav, On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 03:36:19PM -0500, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > > Chris asked me to take over maintenance in Debian as well, and Ghislain > blessed me as well.
Fine for me. > To minimize amount of work for myself, I would like > to continue with NeuroDebian packaging, just polishing it up (copyright > file and may be some cleanup). How NeuroDebian packaging is > different (dropping historical perspective) ATM it is at > http://github.com/neurodebian/dcm2niix Please do not do this. The development platform for Debian packages is salsa.debian.org and *lots* of QA tools are relying to find the packaging code here. I do not mind about the team but I mind a lot about the host any Blends package can be found. > - main difference is our git repo sitting on top of the upstream so we > also can produce an .orig. tarball with dcm_qa submodule which > provides data for testing of correct operation. That increases the > tarball size but IMHO it is worth it! I do not mind about the tarball size. > - we run (build-time only ATM) tests using that dcm_qa/ data. That > already allowed to iron out differences in behavior between i386 and > amd64. > > I expect though that testing for all the other platforms would open a > huge can of worms. But I think it would be beneficial in the long > run to name them all ;) I bet Chris (the upstream) would be > "thrilled" to help nailing them down > > any objections on relying on gbp to produce orig source tarballs? > > - in a rush toward "let's converge packaging" I have added needed then > epoch 1: to the versioning. It would need to "propagate" into > Debian. I hope that is ok We all know epochs are ugly but sometimes needed. > - we still use debhelper 9 for maximal ease of backportability. > > any objections? No. > - we do carry a few patches > https://github.com/neurodebian/dcm2niix/tree/debian/debian/patches > including patches for the packaging backports on elderly jessie (and > equally old ubuntus) > > https://github.com/neurodebian/dcm2niix/blob/debian/debian/patches/jessie-dsc-patch > probably some symlinks for really old /EOLed ubuntus could be removed, > will do now > > But any objections against carrying backport patches? No. > Please let me know what you think All those packaging details sound sensible but please, pretty please stick to salsa.d.o. Thank you for your work on this package Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
