Hi Andrew, On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 04:33:04PM +0200, Andrew Shadura wrote: > > in my response to the ITP #722429. The Vcs fields in the packaging > > above are not set and I personally would not consider sponsering of > > packages who are not maintained in VCS. At the contrary I'm > > explicitly offering tp sponsor Blends related packages[1] which to my > > astonishment is heavily ignored despite people are claiming that it > > is hard to find a sponsor... > > Andreas, why are you suggesting GIS team, not OSM team? OSM team seems > to be a little bit more specific to OSM somehow.
That's a valid question. The answer is that there is some effort to merge both teams. I just discussed this on both mailing lists and at the Debian GIS/OSM meeting at DebConf. The rationale to merge into Debian GIS is that the whole pkg-osm team is way smaller and not very active (you could say MIA). You can also get some impression about my statement when comparing the teammetrics of both teams: Uploads: http://blends.debian.net/liststats/uploaders_debian-gis.png http://blends.debian.net/liststats/uploaders_pkg-osm.png Bugs closed: http://blends.debian.net/liststats/bugs_debian-gis.png http://blends.debian.net/liststats/bugs_pkg-osm.png and others (see all the images at this web URL). Moreover the split of groups effectively adds some friction to a reasonable cooperation with UbuntuGIS (which also includes OSM). In short: There are pretty good chances that pkg-osm will be merged into Debian GIS which also has several OSM tools even now (despite its not in the name of the team). So it is reasonable to start in Debian GIS from the beginning. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130911190325.ga17...@an3as.eu