On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Andreas Tille <andr...@an3as.eu> wrote: > Hi again, > > my mail to pkg-grass-devel about more or less highjacking their > (orphaned) prepearation for metapackages in the Blends style did not > triggered any response. The good news is that obviosely nobody is > against my action and so I consider the move of the GIS Blends stuff to > > svn://svn.debian.org/blends/projects/gis > > as accepted. IMHO it would be a good idea to remove the old stuff from > pkg-grass SVN and possibly set a svn:external property for those who > might wonder what happened.
The blends-style page looks nice. Thanks for your effort > > The bad news about the missing response is that there is obviosely a > lack of interest from the GIS people in driving a Blend. IMHO it would > be a really good idea to release Squeeze with some gis-* metapackages in > version 0.1. I kept two obviosely interested people (maintainers of GIS > applications) form the Debian Med team in CC - they might support my > statement that the existence of the Debian Med project has drastically > improved Debian's relevance for the use in medical care and science. I don't really get the link between the projects success and the presence of metapackages and/or a blend (in fact I even didn't know that blends existed), it seems quite logical that succesful projects can manage to find someone interested in creating such a blend. I *do* believe having a discussion how debianGIS could attract more people is interesting, so thanks for raising the issue. I believe the only way to get more developers is to attract more users, and giving them a chance to contribute in their own way, eg by helping out people with gis problems on the mailinglist. > > So my idea is to give Debian a similar spin in GIS and I hope that > people would try to make the step from simply adding GIS applications to > the Debian package pool to start thinking in a Blend-ish which tries to > deliver a complete working environment for GIS experts, hobby GIS > adictives like OSM mappers etc. My first step in this direction is to > provide the Blends tasks pages (how these are maintained is explained > in my previous mail). Perhaps we should collaborate more closely with the osgeo live cd team - check which of their stuff can be included in debian instead of added by them. > > Moreover I would recommend using a GIS team policy for packaging like we > did in the Debian Med team to enable including more developers into > the team. Does anybody read policies? Adding a 'how to help' part in the wiki seems useful, but having a 'policy for packaging'? > _______________________________________________ Pkg-grass-devel mailing list Pkgfirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel