So I ran into an interesting quagmire of dependencies. The moral of the story, I would like to propose that RC candidates of apps stay in "unstable" and not trickle into "stable" and maybe not even into "testing" (this could be a little looser).
Particularly the issue I ran into is that spatialite 2.3.1 isn't in the repos at all, Lucid has 2.3.0 but it seems stuck on geos 3.1.0 which is making my QGIS crash. I would upgrade to spatialite 2.4 RC but I'm not sure that plays nice with GeoDjango yet. So under my idea Stable would have 2.3.0 or 2.3.1, QGIS 1.5(Could be upgraded after we know 1.6 is safe) Testing would also have 2.3.1, QGIS 1.6 Unstable would have 2.4 RC x That way in testing there would be a nice reliable set of QGIS, gdal, spatialite etc that are known to be fairly good and unstable would have more cutting edge stuff. I realize maverick included spatialite 2.4RC and think that may have actually been a mistake since the author admits it's a bit buggy (not to say 2.3.x series doesn't have it's issues). But more importantly some underlying changes could cause issues for QGIS, GeoDjango etc. In summary having some slightly older version no longer available in Debian or Ubuntu might actually be a + to the everyday user if the distro jumps the gun on an app(in stable of course). This needs a little fine tuning obviously since GRASS tends to have really long release cycles and maybe could be summed as the "testing" ppa has the last known stable release. Any thoughts? Thanks, Alex PS: I'm more than willing to help package, just still new at it. Looks like gpsprune for Lucid worked and I would love to have that copied to ubuntugis. _______________________________________________ UbuntuGIS mailing list Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki