Your message dated Tue, 22 Feb 2005 18:55:27 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Closing since 5.7 is going in has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -------------------------------------- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 26 Jul 2004 09:50:50 +0000 >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jul 26 02:50:50 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from pooh.kjernsmo.net [217.77.32.186] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1Bp28A-0007vZ-00; Mon, 26 Jul 2004 02:50:50 -0700 Received: from ti100710a080-7282.bb.online.no ([80.213.252.114] helo=owl.kjernsmo.net) by pooh.kjernsmo.net with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Bp27e-0000kz-9Q for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 26 Jul 2004 11:50:18 +0200 Received: from kjetil by owl.kjernsmo.net with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1Bp27r-0001lt-00 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 26 Jul 2004 11:50:31 +0200 From: Kjetil Kjernsmo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: grass: Please consider GRASS 5.3 for Sarge X-Debbugs-CC: Kjetil Kjernsmo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 11:50:31 +0200 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-11.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE, X_DEBBUGS_CC autolearn=ham version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 X-Spam-Level: Package: grass Version: 5.0.3-4 Severity: wishlist I have over the past couple of weeks read up a little bit on GRASS, and I have communicated with the developers of GRASS. I'm still new user, I'm an astrophysicist looking into GIS, but I'm trying to get started. It is has become compelling to me that Sarge should ship with the 5.3 branch of GRASS rather than the 5.0 branch. I hope to make a compelling argument in this wishlist bug. As far as I have understood the upstream developers, version 5.3.1 is due out soon, and I hope the maintainers will consider packaging this version when it is ready. The 5.0 branch is stable in the sense "doesn't change", not in the sense "works more reliably". There are many problems in the 5.0.3 release that are not likely to be fixed, but are allready fixed in 5.3. Among them are many if not most of the bugs reported against this package. It is my understanding that it is Debian Stable role to have a reliable and predictable platform, and so, it is the distributions role to "don't change". Obviously, very moving targets is bad for a distribution, since you might coincidentally get a snapshot at a time when it was unstable. The other extreme, basing the distribution on non-changing software, I see very little value in, as I view it as a feature of Debian Stable to do the freeze at a reasonable time. The 5.0 release is allready two years outdated. This includes features and bugfixes. To me, the current 5.0.3 are unusable, due to bugs that will be fixed in upstream 5.3.1. If one insists on shipping Sarge with 5.0.3, one would have to backport many bugfixes from the 5.3 branch to get the packages in usable state -- a daunting task indeed. Furthermore, if Sarge is released with 5.0.3, GRASS in Debian will most likely be four years outdated by the next Debian Stable release. At that point, the package will lag so far behind the state of the art that the packages will be unusable to the vast majority of users, and most of the GRASS community will not very likely be very eager to support and help Debian users with their outdated software (I know I wouldn't... :-) ). With the release of 5.3.0 on 15 May 2004, the situation has changed substantially from a few months back. The 5.3 branch is presently not so much of a moving target, as Debian can include a specific release, not just a snapshot of CVS. The 5.3 release has seen many improvements, as well as bugfixes not available in 5.0.3. It therefore seems to be appropriate for Sarge when released. Now, one could of course discuss whether 5.7 should go into unstable. While it has many desireable features, and we have a 5.7.0 release now, it is still much more a moving target than 5.3, and getting it into Sid would risk that Sarge would be released with 5.0.3 if there are release-critical issues with 5.7. I for one would like to avoid that. Getting GRASS 5.3 tested and hopefully included in Sarge is my hope. Then, there is the possibility of having 5.7 in experimental. I realize that packaging GRASS and making sure it builds automatically on all architectures is a non-trivial matter, and I wish to thank the maintainers for putting time into this. -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers testing APT policy: (990, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.7-ruby.2004-07-25.owl.1.oss Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C Versions of packages grass depends on: ii fftw2 [fftw2-double] 2.1.3-16 Library for computing Fast Fourier ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-13 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libfreetype6 2.1.7-2.1 FreeType 2 font engine, shared lib ii libgd2-noxpm 2.0.23-2 GD Graphics Library version 2 (wit ii libgdal1 1.2.0-1 Geospatial Data Abstraction Librar ii libice6 4.3.0.dfsg.1-4 Inter-Client Exchange library ii libncurses5 5.4-4 Shared libraries for terminal hand ii libpng12-0 1.2.5.0-6 PNG library - runtime ii libpq3 7.4.2-4 Shared library libpq.so.3 for Post ii libreadline4 4.3-11 GNU readline and history libraries ii libsm6 4.3.0.dfsg.1-4 X Window System Session Management ii libtiff3g 3.5.7-2 Tag Image File Format library ii libx11-6 4.3.0.dfsg.1-4 X Window System protocol client li ii libxext6 4.3.0.dfsg.1-4 X Window System miscellaneous exte ii libxmu6 4.3.0.dfsg.1-4 X Window System miscellaneous util ii tcl8.3 8.3.5-4 Tcl (the Tool Command Language) v8 ii tcsh [c-shell] 6.13.00-1 TENEX C Shell, an enhanced version ii tk8.3 8.3.5-4 Tk toolkit for Tcl and X11, v8.3 - ii xlibmesa-gl [libgl1] 4.3.0.dfsg.1-4 Mesa 3D graphics library [XFree86] ii xlibmesa-glu [libglu1] 4.3.0.dfsg.1-4 Mesa OpenGL utility library [XFree ii xlibs 4.3.0.dfsg.1-4 X Window System client libraries m ii zlib1g 1:1.2.1.1-5 compression library - runtime -- no debconf information --------------------------------------- Received: (at 261483-done) by bugs.debian.org; 22 Feb 2005 17:57:17 +0000 >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Feb 22 09:57:17 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from pooh.kjernsmo.net [217.77.32.186] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1D3eHd-0005JM-00; Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:57:17 -0800 Received: from [80.254.47.36] (helo=roo.kjernsmo.net) by pooh.kjernsmo.net with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1D3eH6-0001Ah-HA for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tue, 22 Feb 2005 18:56:44 +0100 From: Kjetil Kjernsmo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Closing since 5.7 is going in Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 18:55:27 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.1 X-FOAF: http://www.kjetil.kjernsmo.net/foaf.rdf MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Hi! With 5.7/6.0 going into unstable, I think a big w00t, *claps* and a done is the right thing to do to this bug. Thanks, everybody! Kjetil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]