On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 6:25 PM, A. Maitland Bottoms <[email protected]> wrote: > Mathieu Malaterre writes: > > On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 10:51 PM, Steve M. Robbins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Coincidentally, a couple of days ago I asked the vtk maintainer > > > whether he would be interested in group maintenance of VTK. However, > > > I suggested pkg-scicomp rather than debian-med as VTK isn't > > > particularly "medical". > > I'm hoping some pkg-scicomp or debian-med types would entertain collaborating > in a git-based repository. Certainly I have had a look at svn-buildpackage > and it has appeal, but VTK has a lot of dependencies to manage. > > In addition to supporting Debian's Experimental, Unstable-Testing-Stable, > there is also backports to be thought of, and perhpas tweaking for other > Debian derived distributions. Keep in mind that Debian's ability to support > multiple versions of components such as Qt and Python has added some > complications > to the expectations in VTK that there is only one version of a component on > any given system to build with. It appears that git branching support would > be helpful in this case. > > But what really sold me on git is that much wildly-optimistic speculative > packaging > concepts could be tried in local git branches without cluttering up the main > packaging branches. This may be helpful in improving Java support, and in > dealing > with any issues arising from Python 3.0 upgrades. > > > svn co > https://gdcm.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gdcm/Sandbox/debian-med/vtk > > I'll be using that while I get used to working with git-buildpackage.
I am from the pkg-scicomp team: let's use git, it's much better than svn. Ondrej -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
