Hi Jay, Jay Berkenbilt <q...@debian.org> (19/05/2012): > Can you think of any reason that this could possibly cause any harm? > I don't think it will since it won't have any impact at all on > packages that don't explicitly build depend on libtiff5-alt-dev. I'm > going to go ahead and do the upload. If it's a bad idea for some > reason that I am failing to see, it can always be rejected from NEW. > > If this is a bad idea for some reason, I would really like to find a > solution so that vips and nip2 (among others) can have bigtiff support > before wheezy.
I'd appreciate if you could give us a few days to get back to you on this. I think Julien is more or less the only one of us who looked into libtiff stuff, so I think it makes sense to wait for his input. Mraw, KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
