Bug#657288: transition: gdcm

2012-02-05 Thread Mathieu Malaterre
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: >> - binNMU insighttoolkit > > I've now scheduled that and will look at scheduling the other packages > (see http://release.debian.org/transitions/html/gdcm.html) once > insighttoolkit's done. excellent ! >> igstk is not using gdcm API and t

Bug#657288: transition: gdcm

2012-02-04 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Wed, 2012-01-25 at 11:13 +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > GDCM 2.2.0 introduces a new ABI, as seen on #655783 and al. > Since API (whatever that means for C++) is preserved, would it be a good time > to > - move gdcm 2.2.0 from experimental to unstable We've covered that one already. :-) >

Bug#657288: transition: gdcm

2012-02-03 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On 02.02.2012 20:55, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Wed, 2012-01-25 at 11:13 +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: GDCM 2.2.0 introduces a new ABI, as seen on #655783 and al. Since API (whatever that means for C++) is preserved, would it be a good

Bug#657288: transition: gdcm

2012-02-02 Thread Mathieu Malaterre
Hi Adam, On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Wed, 2012-01-25 at 11:13 +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: >> GDCM 2.2.0 introduces a new ABI, as seen on #655783 and al. >> Since API (whatever that means for C++) is preserved, would it be a good >> time to >> - move gdcm 2.2.0

Processed: Re: Bug#657288: transition: gdcm

2012-02-02 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 657288 + pending Bug #657288 [release.debian.org] transition: gdcm Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 657288: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=657288 Debian

Bug#657288: transition: gdcm

2012-02-02 Thread Adam D. Barratt
tags 657288 + pending thanks On Wed, 2012-01-25 at 11:13 +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > GDCM 2.2.0 introduces a new ABI, as seen on #655783 and al. > Since API (whatever that means for C++) is preserved, would it be a good time > to > - move gdcm 2.2.0 from experimental to unstable Apparently

Bug#657288: transition: gdcm

2012-01-25 Thread Mathieu Malaterre
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition GDCM 2.2.0 introduces a new ABI, as seen on #655783 and al. Since API (whatever that means for C++) is preserved, would it be a good time to - move gdcm 2.2.0 from experimental to unstab