Re: Debian science package nursery
On Thu, 18 Aug 2005, Albin Blaschka wrote: something similar is already happening with the Debian-GIS/ pkg-grass-general - list: The aim of the people behind is to bring GIS-Software (Geographic Information Systems) into Debian. The starting point was GRASS, therefore the (now outdated) name, but now it is dealing with various packages/programmes. See also: http://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?DebianGisRepository This is what I meant with more specific packages approach. BTW: Wouldn't it be a good idea to collect/document all those science-related work within Debian? I know of DebianGIS, there is DebianMed...what else? There was a slight shine of Debian-Physics at horizon but nothing really happened to my knowledge. In the beginning of Debian-Med I've got a flamish mail that I should not occupy biology with Debian-Med. My answer is just valid: If someone starts a Debian-Bio project I would be happy to upload half of my work to these people. ;-) Nothing in this direction really happened and because medical research needs all this biological stuff I just care for it. My strong suggestion would be to join the Custom Debian Distribution effort to make profit from the techniques which will be developed there. The more we use common techniques the less work we have. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian science package nursery
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Albin Blaschka wrote: Mhmm, in general I am a biologist, too, and so I would be interested in a Debian-Bio-Project in general. (but at the moment I am contracted with very very little spare-time...) That's the problem of many interested people - or rather for biologists the problem is not that hard because their field is just covered by Debian-Med. :) I would suggest to join this effort until it becomes obvious that it will not scale any more. From your mails I guess you are working more in a laboraty-oriented field of biology. Of which kind of work are you talking? Analysis of gene sequences of bacteria and viruses as well as gene sequences to identify diseases. Yes it is more or less laboraty-oriented and the software inside Debian covers this field. So what would be interesting, would be at least a list of packages and a little brainstorming what can be possible (wiki?). Having a list of other packages would be interesting. Any one interested? Critics? Comments? I know it is a little vague... If you know it is vague, perhaps posting to this list a short summary of packages which are in your mind. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITK Debian packaging
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Guanglei Xiong wrote: BTW, I still think packaging and publishing for Debian is free and accessible for every human being. So does Debian itself. There should be no restriction that someone has already packaged something, and some others must not package and publish it. I am not aware whether is appropriate in Debian. Some people are free to correct me. We have the concept that a maintainer is responsible for a certain piece of software. Debian policy says that if somebody issues an ITP he claims to become the maintainer of this software. The Debian-QA team tries to ensure that an ITP is not blocking packaging for years if there is no further development. But if Gavin insists in wanting to package this it would be against Debian rules to take this over. I would not sponsor the package with a Closes: ITP-bug-number and there should be only one. But we try to establish the concept of group maintainance because Free Software is about working together instead of competing with each other (well, in principle - there is also some useful competition but not in maintaining the same software for Debian). So try to arange some useful cooperation for this package to move ot as quick as possible to the Debian mirror. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITK debian packages
On Mon, 28 Nov 2005, Steve M. Robbins wrote: What's the state of the packaging today? http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/i/insighttoolkit Are they uploadable? Not yet and I told Gavin Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] (who did a really great job) the reasons why I think some work is necessary. He might decide where and how to ask for help and I think Gavin should do the main coordination if there is some need for cooperation. Have you a sponsor for them? I'm a Debian Developer and could do the sponsor/upload if that would be helpful. In general I'm happy to sponsor packages that fall into the scope of Debian-Med (some of the ITK packaging issues were discussed on the debian-med mailing list). But I definitely have enough work to do and I would regard it sane if the sponsor uses the package himself. Thus I would be happy if you would volunteer for the sponsoring. If you ask me I would prefer to continue the discussion about this on the Debian-Med mailing list if nothing speaks explicitely for keeping it on debian-science. If Gavin has no time to respond until the end of this week I might give a summary of the hints I gave to his packaging to keep you informed about the status. Kind regards and thanks for your interest Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debconf 6
On Sun, 4 Dec 2005, Frederic Lehobey wrote: Are there any plans to have some followup at debconf 6 with respect to the scientific use of Debian? I'd love to see continuous effort in this topic and I would love even more if the Custom Debian Distribution idea http://people.debian.org/~tille/cdd/ to have a solid technical base for what we are doing. Are people on this list interested in settling some gathering there? (Who already knows s/he will go?) Unfortunately I'll be unable to go to MX because I will move to a new house in this time. So real live issues will stop me from joining ... Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Genetics Program
On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: The next Quantian release will have once again a large selection of tools incl a complete set of BioConductor packages (that part is not in Debian) but What BioConductor version are you using? The BioConductor movement to official Debian is a little bit stalled. Matt Hope has an ITP, inofficial packages of an old version and no time to respond to any question. I would love if we could get this beast into Debian but have no time to care for it personally. Other people who claimed to have interest and wanted to do work on an alioth project I have started seemed to have lost interest. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Packaging and Maintaining
On Thu, 8 Dec 2005, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: Andreas' URL to the Debian Med project also had a lot of bio/generics pointers. ... and if you konow something that is missing on this page just write an e-mail to the debian-med list - that's what this list is for. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian Science Extremadura work session?
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Frederic Lehobey wrote: That would be great. Personally, I favor the March meeting because we would possibly see its output show up in Etch, but the most important Ahhh, you think Etch will be released in December? ;-))) duck We could also add live CD stuff to the schedule would there be enough people interested. While ifor instance Quantian is a great contribution I do not think that live CD stuff is really related to scientific software. It is just a form scientific software can be brought to the user. Thus I think a separate meeting for this topic might make sense. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: pdfscreen -- latex presentation viewer
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Brett Viren wrote: Well, that is certanily a hard point to argue! I've never done more than look into pdfscreen so I can't say much about it. Except for one experiment with a groff based presentation maker, a few excruciatingly painful GUIs (OpenOffice and PowerPoint, I'm looking at you!) and an occasional skribe compilation I've always used latex. I went from slides to seminar to prosper and now use beamer exclusively. To me each was an exponential improvement on the previous. I fully agree here. When I decided to leave MagicPoint to find some LaTeX based presentation program I checked 4 or 5 different things (I do not remember all). Beamer was by far the best and I never regret the decision to use beamer (only that I did not switched at a much earlier point in time is regretable). Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian for Systems Biology
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006, Luca Brivio wrote: On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:24:09 +0900 Charles Plessy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But I think that the real problem is that most academic software is non-free, as it often mentions Do not make money with our work, or share it with us. Thus splitting debian-med would result in dilluting sparse packages into something not really useful. That's likely true. It's also true that things are slowly changing... and we can run in that direction ;-) Well, IMHO it makes no sense to split up Debian-Med before something else covers the problem we solve. IMHO the Custom Debian Distribution idea (Debian-Med is one of the CDDs see http://people.debian.org/~tille/cdd/ ) is about grouping sunsets of Debian into practical pieces of software that a certain group of users needs. There might be intersection inbetween these subsets which means if there would be an imaginary Debian-Science CDD or a Debian-Bio CDD that some packages could be included via the meta packages in more than one CDD. So if a biologist installs a imaginary meta package 'bio-genetics' it might perfectly be possible that a user working in medical care installs the 'med-bio' package (which just exists!) and gets nearly the same set of packages on his box. Then, why don't we try to gather more packages related to computational biology, and when a critical mass is reached, we could discuss with Andreas and the debian-med people to ask if a renaming of the project into something like debian-biomed would make sense? I told about software that often concerns mathematics and biochemistry etc. more than medicine, does make it sense that all what's biology-related become part of debian-med/bio-med, included e.g. industrial biotech? Well, it perhaps make some sense until the mass of free software in these fields doesn't exceed one threshold... So just start caring for an optimal solution for biologists before you try to start arguing how we can stop users in medical care from easily installing some biology related software, right. It is not the problem of Debian-Med that there is no other help for biologists that they get some comfort by installing apackage that starts with 'med-'. Why don't we create a very simple wiki page? My personal experience of Wiki pages in small projects is that they are not really maintained. That's why I save my personal time and do not create such a page. If you think differently - just start the page. I will not stop you. ;-)) I can help for testing or translating packages (a surprisingly big number of computational biologists are very uncomfortable with english). If there is a lot of packaging to do, well, you would have to teach me... and me too! I can help in the same things, And I'll try soon to make some unofficial packages. This would be great. You can count on my support in sponsoring these packages. Charles, if you would to contact me you can see below ;-) Just use the mailing list here. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian for Systems Biology
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: Luca and I chatted briefly on jabber, and we are about to open a wiki page on www.open-bio.org, in which we will list packages in molecular biology and systems biology which could make it into debian, and see how we can help it to happen. Why not use the already-existing Debian wiki page at http://wiki.debian.org/DebianScienceBiology ? (For those who aren't aware, you don't need to be a Debian Developer to edit the wiki; you just need to create an account there for yourself.) Ahh, this is also a reasonable idea: We could just use this wiki as kind of a TODO-list for updates of http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med/microbio everybody could add projects to this list after checking the page above. This would probably a nice help for Tobias who cares for the Debian-Med pages. Even better would be if there would be some license information and a short description inside the Wiki. Once it would be moved to the official web pages the Debian-WWW translation team cares for the translation. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian Science Extremadura work session?
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, Frederic Lehobey wrote: So far, at the time of writing, only 3 three people have expressed their interest (plus Andreas Tille for December : http://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2006/01/msg00073.html) and, as far as I know, none of them (excepted Andreas) are Debian developers. I have not seen any precondition that participants have to be DDs. Should we focus on other meeting dates (December is now planned for a QA session: http://wiki.debian.org/WorkSessionsExtremadura)? Are there enough people interested to produce something useful? Should we even meet at all? ;-) IMHO yes, definitely. While I see a big need for a QA session in December (related to the planned release) I would have much things to discuss related science (especially in the CDD scope). Andreas' message (http://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2006/01/msg00101.html) suggests some slots could be double-booked. Should we ask other work sessions if it would be feasible? (I think for example of the DebianEdu people for possible synergies http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/Extremadura2006). In some aspects science and education might fit and the Debian-Edu people are very good organized and thus I would think the cooperation might fit. On the other hand I know from other Debian-Edu gatherings that there are many interested people and I'm afraid that this meeting might be overbooked. * who will be at Fosdem 2006? I will. :-) As I mentioned I will not because my self-imposed abstinence from FOSS meetings until summer (and my house will be finished). So it is an opportunity to eventually meet with other attendants interested in science support in Debian (I will mostly hang around Debian room). I hope some people will be around. It's just a question how to draw their attention to keep them all in a common room at the same time ... Still true would it be useful to Debian. I hope somebody will care for a Debian-Science meeting in Extremadura. It would be a shame if we would miss this opportunity. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: alternatives to gnuplot ?
On Thu, 6 Apr 2006, maicon wrote: Xmgrace is a respectable plot application in scientic comunit and you can do all that origin makes and even more ! i recommend !! Labpot is a excelente progam to! Scigraphica i never use but . If I'm not completely wrong the issue was that the programs you mention are not able to automatically process data without user interaction, but perhaps I missed something. I use gnuplot because I can obtain data from a database, call gnuplot and obtain images without any interaction. In the long run I will probably switch to R because I reached some limits of gnuplot (which I like in principle). Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Extremadura meeting
Hi, having read the report about i18n meeting in Extremadura at dda I wonder how the status of a proposed CDD meeting or Debian science meeting in Extremadura is? I vanished a little bit from the scene in the first half of this year and thus I'm seeking for the following information: 1. Is there any sponsored meeting not yet asigned and thus free for a CDD / Debian-science meeting? 2. Is there any interest or some work in progress towards such meeting. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Extremadura meeting
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006, [UTF-8] César Gómez Martín wrote: Sorry, there are no more free slots. The last one will be the Debian QA meeting of December. This makes perfectly sense - I just wanted to make sure that we will not miss any option. Since no group was interested in having a meeting on March 2006 we spent the money of that meeting in having some oversees in the I18n meeting. Well done! Maybe we will sponsor some other meetings for next year if there is enough budget, you will have to wait a bit, sorry for this. No need to sorry. We have to thank you for the very welcome and reasonable help and will wait patiently whether there will be some similar offer in the future. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Re: [Help] Please compile clustalw on architectures ia64, mips, mipsel, s390 and m68k
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: Ah, the pain with no autobuilders for non-free packages. Exactly. You will have to find a developer with access to all of the architectures ia64, mips, mipsel and s390 (m68k is ignored), and get them to build binaries of the package. In principle this might be every developer via http://db.debian.org/machines.cgi but it is just a pain to do it this way (and does not always work - at least when I tried some months ago I was not able to compile the package I tried). Or you can ask the ftpmasters to remove the binaries for these archs, but that normally take longer time. That would be stupid because we *want* the architectures. What about convincing the upstream developers to change the license to one of the free software licenses? It would solve the problem for good. When I maintained this package I tried and I guess my successors tried as well. Another solution was suggested nearly 5 years ago http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2001/11/msg01472.html and if I remember also at other occurences but the search interface for the list archive does not uncover these mails and Google found only this one for a quick glance. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Help] Please compile clustalw on architectures ia64, mips, mipsel, s390 and m68k
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006, Andreas Tille wrote: When I maintained this package I tried and I guess my successors tried as well. Another solution was suggested nearly 5 years ago http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2001/11/msg01472.html and if I remember also at other occurences but the search interface Just to reply to my own mail: I blamed the search interface to fast: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2002/11/msg00270.html Just read the mails of these both threads and learn why we have not yet autobuilders for non-free. IMHO the main issue is that nobody really _did_ it. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BALLView - a molecular viewer and modeling tool
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: I'm pretty sure you meant to say Architecture: any here. (For anyone who might need clarification: an Architecture: any package must Yes, Thanks for the hint. I hope this didn't come across as nitpicky, just wanted to make sure things were clear for anyone new to Debian packaging who might be reading the lists. I don't know nitpicking. If there is a mistake it should be corrected. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BALLView - a molecular viewer and modeling tool
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Andreas wrote: 4. debian/compat The current debhelper version is 5.x. So if you have no certain reason (like backporting to Sarge for instance), I would recommend to use debhelper 5 here. I used the version 4 because otherwise I could not build the package on the Edgy Ubuntu. The package works fine with the older version of debhelper. So if you aware of this fact and have reasons to keep version 4 it is fine. perhaps we should write a lintian bug report. The problem: In /usr/share/BALL/bin and /usr/share/BALL/lib there are binary architecture dependant files. This is forbidden. The solution would be as follows: I fixed the used directories as you suggested. Fine. In case the binary expects the doc files at a certain location put symlinks into this place. This is still a problem, I tried to create the symlinks, such that they will be created in the debian/ballview folder, but when the package is finished, the links are disappeared and instead there are real folders under /usr/share/BALL/doc. Do I have to create the links in the ballview.postinst.debhelper file? Have a look into man dh_link For the moment I would dislike splitting up the package because I guess it would complicate thinks further. Is there a serious problem with the current packaging form? Yes. You should definitely use a binary _any_ package with the binary dependant part and a binary _all_ package with all files that work under all architectures (except man pages who are usually shipped with the binary in one package). The rationale behind is to keep the ftp archive (and especially bandwidth and space of the mirrors all over the world) clean of duplicated files that do not need to be duplicated. There is probably no need to split up doc and data if the doc is used as online help and is needed anyway. So this can be put into a ballview-common package, but using such a package is really high recommended. It depends a little bit from the ratio of the size of binary and independant files to make ftpmaster force you to split the package but IMHO splitting ballview is necessary. And for the BALL library: I have thought about creating either an extra development package with the full BALL library or a header and static lib dev package. My guess is that both would not be too useful for the following reason: The library has around 20 different configure options and thus can be adapted to differing needs, e.g. by switching features on and off. Therefore I guess that for every developer that wants to seriously use the library, it would be better to configure and build the library from the sources. This also allows to compile and run the tests and benchmarks. Well, you are the expert and I have no idea how this optional features are used. I also wonder if you decide for a certain set of options whether it will not be possible to provide a development package with the very same set of options and add a README that if you need different options you have to compile the development library on your own. But as I said the developmen package is a bonus and there is no need to provide it for the first shot. On the other hand I guess people will ask you for it (I just realized it for the WOrdNet package where I never expected people to ask for it). Maybe I am wrong? Maybe I'm wrong as well. ;-) I have changed the control file yet an other time to support any arch. Fine. By the way, Andreas Moll, the PPC architecture name in Debian is powerpc and not ppc, as in foo_1.0-3_powerpc.deb, just in case there was some doubt... Where is this name used, except for the control file? I personally have no idea. Kind regards and thanks for your work on ballview Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Possible gatherings of Debian-science people
On Tue, 6 Feb 2007, Frederic Lehobey wrote: The Extremadura meetings are over, but a similar opportunity has been proposed by CETRIL (and somewhat not enough advertised) in Soissons (France). The coming session (in February) is dedicated to Debian-edu: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/DevCampFrance2007 but is not strictly limited to it (I feel there are many skills that can be shared between CDD-like distributions). They still have (many) places left for those who might be interested in. I feel quite close to Debian-Edu because they are fullfilling kind of a role model. http://www.debian.org/events/2007/0224-fosdem But nothing really science related so far. Who will be there? I was not yet at FOSDEM at any time and will not be there this year, but probably next year. Not being registered there, I do not know whether something related to science has been proposed (but I have not seen anything such on this list). I applied for a general CDD talk but details for debian-science are not yet planned. Moreover I want to organize a Debian-Med day as I did in Helsinki. IMHO it would perfectly fit if we would enlarge the scope of this because it was in fact only half a day and thus we would be able to discuss some more general issues. - the next LSM / RMLL (in France, July 2007). http://www.rmll.info/ (no English version so far, it seems, sorry) There will be a science topic (2 days). I am involved in its organisation and will send a call for contributions on this list in the coming days. Where exactly is this in France. I was on this event three times in Bordeaux and one time in Metz. I missed it last year. It is an interesting event if **we** organize a meeting between **us**. The official organisation was sometimes a bit weak, but the plugged in DebConfs in 2000 and 2001 were *really* great. There is a possibility (not yet confirmed) of a CETRIL DevCamp similar to the one mentioned above for Debian-edu (30 people) around LSM/RMLL event (week before or after July 14th). Would any people of Debian-science be interested in participating in such a coding event? (I am pushing the Debian-science topic to be considered alongside Debian-edu). Definitely. With respect to the above events, I will attend Fosdem and try to free myself to go to the Debian-edu DevCamp. I am unsure whether Debconf is of any interest with respect to science related matters (I had no time to propose a talk there). It is definitely. And I will try to make the LSM / RMLL science topic an attractive event (any suggestions welcome, the earlier, the better). :-) I could talk about the biological part of Debian-Med and propose techniques to use. As a physicist by profession I'm also interested in other matters. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Question
On Sun, 11 Feb 2007, Joel Merrick wrote: Fuck off you weird prick. Uhmm, what? Is there any reason to offend a poster this way? On 2/10/07, Jonano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are developing a project called Futurismos, an OS for scientists and we search some people able to help us. IMHO the best idea would be to join the Debian-Science effort. There are a plenty of people working on it. We would need a better visuability. Debian is quite visible and Debian-Science as the scientific effort inside Debian is becomming more visible in the Debian universe if more people are contributing to it. I don't know if you can help us? Would you want to talk about our initiative? Well, talking is not really the intention. We try to do real work. Try to add scientific software that is not yet included in Debian or try to enhance the scientific software inside Debian. It is not really clear what your goal is but I smell you try to reinvent the existing wheel. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Installing the whole set of scientific packages
On Sun, 11 Feb 2007, Lisandro [iso-8859-1] Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: Perhaps a metapackage should be done, best if coordinated through this list. Well, the meta-package technique is supported easily through cdd-dev package. Feel free to ask me if ou have trouble implementing scientific meta packages set. I guess the debian-med package might be a reasonable example to suppoet all features, especially because the biological part should be ready. I understand that it would be _too_ difficult due to the quantity of science-related packages, but from a begginers point of view, it wouldn't be so much a bad idea. Well, I think *because* of the quantity we need such a collection of scientific related software. Another very reasonable approach is debtagging the scientific packages and use the features of debtags to install scientific packages. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Re: Installing the whole set of scientific packages
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007, Lisandro [utf-8] Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: Well, I am reading tasksel's README.gz. Some things I found: * To get a new task added to Debian, please file a bug report on tasksel. Did you ever tried? So we make a list (or perhaps a tree, to follow Carlo Segre's suggestion) of the packages we would like into the tasksel and send the bug report? Is there another way to not overload tasksel's maintainers (and perhaps, be more independent)? Yes: Reducing the list to one single entry meta-package and maintain the Meta package dependencies on your own. This would make one single bug report necessary and not one tasksel bug report per included scientific package. * In Debian, we mostly use the task-fields method, which is built into tasksel, and looks for Task fields in the control data of available packages, that list the name of the task. Another available method is standard, which just installs all standard priority packages, and another is manual, which, as a special case, runs aptitude interactively to select what to install. According to this, we could ask science-related packages maintainers to add the tag (I don't clearly understando this paragraph, but I think is mainly because I didn't used tasksel before to set packages :-) ) I don't know how good the task-fields method works (I did not investigated into tasksel since Sarge release), but it would at least need to bother maintainers of a lot of applications. So why not staying intependant from so many maintainers if the solution is that easy and provides more benefits? Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Re: Installing the whole set of scientific packages
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007, [utf-8] Damián Viano wrote: - debian-science - debian-science-bio - debian-science-math - debian-science-physics - debian-science-chem What do others think? Am I missing something? Should we s/science// from the second level packages? s/debian// ? I would vote for leaving out debian- in front of the package names. Wouldn't such classification make packages like scipy hard to include? I think we have also - science-geo - science-astro Moreover I would add *-dev packages. At least in Debian-Med we work with med-bio and med-bio-dev because you often have some development related packages that are not really needed to just use the applications. Moreover I think we have some inter-science requzirements, like - science-plotting - science-statistics or something like that. Should TeX packages be included in any category, which? This falls into the same league like plotting. We might add a - science-typesetting or something like that. (keep in mind that tex have his own section, so creating another category/meta-package would be redundant if you ask me) Yes, I'm unsure whether this makes sense. Perhaps adding a Recommends: tex into the general debian-science package. BTW, the recommends and suggests options make clear why the meta packages approach is more powerfull than tasksel. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Re: Installing the whole set of scientific packages
On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Charles Plessy wrote: I think that you can safely make debian-science-bio depend on med-bio and med-bio-dev only. Basic biology is part of Debian Med as preclinical research. Sounds reasonable. In addition to the suggested packages, I think that a debian-science-bibliography would be a must. Good idea. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Installing the whole set of scientific packages
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - debian-science-biology Fine here and dependency of med-bio would make things easy as Charles suggested. - debian-science-genomics - debian-science-pharmaceuticals *If* we had some intersting packages, I would rather create a med-pharmaceuticals package than putting it into science scope. - debian-science-mathematics - debian-science-physics - debian-science-chemistry - debian-science-electrical - debian-science-mechanical - debian-science-astronomy - debian-science-structural - debian-science-architectural - debian-science-medical-imaging Well, why should we add here a medical imaging section. It is covered by Debian-Med. I would rather add a package science-imaging that would be generic for all sciences. - debian-science-signal-processing - debian-science-agricultural - debian-science-geophysical - debian-science-climatology - debian-science-fluid-dynamics This is a pretty good list, so far. I'd like to see added (to your list): - debian-science-archaeology - debian-science-anthropology - debian-science-sociology - debian-science-economics - debian-science-geography - debian-science-psychology Same as -pharmaceuticals. - debian-science-linguistics - debian-science-informatics [which is rather ill-defined... i'm thinking quite specifically of text-mining code, here.] - debian-science-hci[subset of psychology? sort of.] What is hci ? Probably we should start to add the package dependencies to the list above (or perhaps soembody should start a wiki page that would fit more than Re: Re: Re: ... in a mailing list. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Installing the whole set of scientific packages
On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It may not always make sense for things to stay in debian-med's tasks, even if that's where they've traditionally lived. It may make more sense for them to migrate to other task sets / packages, and for debian-med's tasks to inherit wholesale from those tasks. Or it may not :) Well, the good thing about Debian-Med is that it exists. ;-) I explained several times that I do not want to have a hard grip on the biological part if someone else (someone in the sense of a project I'd happily join) would start a working system. The problem is that up to today there was no such project focussing on a collection of biological software that is needed (amongst others) in medical research. On the other hand there is no problem in making an imaginary science-bio meta package dependant from med-bio or even making med-bio dependant from science-bio if this would exist at some point in time. I sense some potential concerns about debian-med's thunder being stolen by a set of upstart science tasks; Well, there is nothing to steal - cooperation would make thunder for both (at least I would hope this). I'm looking at something like debian-science-sociology as a potential sibling to debian-med; the community there is not nearly as advanced w.r.t. adoption of open source tools, barring a few areas, and some advocacy is probably needed. Well, advocacy is one *very* important point (if not even the main point) in the Debian to outsider relation for any Custom Debian Distribution. I think that thinking big is a good thing, here -- just imagine if even 1/3 of the disciplines listed by participants in this conversation had some degree of debian-med's success: Debian would quickly become known as *THE* platform for doing science in those areas... not a bad thing at all. That's the idea. Debian has become the reference platform in several medical projects even if they are not yet included into Debian. Yep. The experimentalists in this camp are reasonably heavy statistics users; they tend to like things like R. Plus all of the packages in the archives that are related somehow to UI development or UI testing there are quite a number, from RAD toolkits all the way up to unit testing widgets for graphical apps (e.g. GUnit). Well, this is fine but as I explained in one of my previous mails I would vote for some field related meta packages, like science-astronomy science-biology science-chemestry ... and some generic meta packages that contain tools for any science science-imaging science-plotting science-statistics ... Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Thread wikified - Was: Re: Installing the whole set of scientific packages
On Sun, 18 Feb 2007, Lisandro [iso-8859-1] Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: [I hope you don't mind if I quite parts of your private mail, but I think int belongs to the mailing list ...] OK, I passed a rough list of the things debated in this thread to http://wiki.debian.org/DebianScienceClassification Thanks for your sumarizing of the metapackages / tasksel thread. I added some hints about helpful debian-edu packages (not complete there are more interesting fields in Debian-Edu but I'm running out of time for the moment. It's a further sign that we have to work together in the Custom Debian Distributions field. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Re: Thread wikified - Was: Re: Installing the whole set of scientific packages
On Sun, 18 Feb 2007, Andreas Tille wrote: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianScienceClassification Thanks for your sumarizing of the metapackages / tasksel thread. I added some hints about helpful debian-edu packages (not complete there are more interesting fields in Debian-Edu but I'm running out of time for the moment. I do not like to quote myself but nobody has shown any effort to complete the wiki. We had some suggestions in the thread about scientific fields we *want* to cover. So far for the brain storming. Now begins the real work: Please start with filling in the dependencies in the Wiki. Once we have a reasonable amount of packages I'd volunteer to start a debian-science package using cdd-dev (if nobody insists and makes a better suggestion). Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BALLView: new package version
[EMAIL PROTECTED] in CC for just announcing the missing of fancyheadings.sty] On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Michael Banck wrote: * tetex-* got retired in Debian, texlive and texlive-latex-extra should get added as Build-Depends. However, that still didn't do it for me, it failed on fancyheadings.sty, and this doesn't appear to be in any package right now. Maybe we will have to do without fancy headings for now. You are right fancyheadings.sty shows up only in tetex-extra and apt-file does not find a hit in texlive. Would you be so kind to write a bug report against texlive because if I understand it right it claims to be a superset of tetex which has exceptions obviousely. I do not regard fancyheadings.sty as a great showstopper but it just happens to be used probably in other source packages. * The way you not just rename upstream's debian/ to debian-upstream/, but extensively use it in debian/rules looks very dubious to me; e.g. debian-upstream/createBALLVIEWDEB looks very un-debianish to me. I really suggest you just ignore debian-upstream; I very much doubt it would pass the ftp-master checks for entering the Debian archive as well. I normally advise upstream to not ship a debian directory in their upstream tarball. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BALLView: new package version
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Andreas Moll wrote: Zivilcourage nennt man das, was von einem Mann übriggeblieben ist, wenn sein Chef das Zimmer betreten hat! -- Wernher Freiherr von Braun (Physiker) Well, Wernher Freiherr von Braun was imho just one other brilliant german opportunist, but the quote is still correct ;) Perhaps he had himself in mind? But, until I have finished my PHD thesis, I am just the will-less slave of my Ph.D. supervisors ;) ;-) What are you doing if there is a packaging issue that has to be fixed in the debian directory and needs a new Debian version? Will you release a new upstream version with unchanged program code? Oh, I feel a bit schizophrenic right now ;) This was intended. I guess such issues can be solved, by the following approach: A patch in downstream, that modifies the script BALL/debian-upstream/createDebianSource such that it modifies the corresponding files after copying the debian-upstream directory to debian. Or am I missing something? Yes: Just leave out the debian directory from upstream source and everything is fine. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Re: libNeXus mostly packaged
On Tue, 22 May 2007, Rudi Cilibrasi, Ph.D. wrote: Therefore, I suggest that one of the two nexus file format libraries undergo a renaming. I would also like to offer up my packages for adoption by somebody who would actually know how to test them better than I would. I have my packages available at [1] and I have already filed an ITP. Whenn reading the diff.gz at this site I learned that you might have found a sponsor for your work who is listed as Uploaders: Paul van Tilburg [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Is this correct? Moreover neither the description in debian/control nor the ITP #411053 do really reflect the double naming trouble and I think you should be more verbose to make clear what the package actually contains. Kind regards and thanks for packaging scientific relevant software Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: libNeXus mostly packaged
On Tue, 22 May 2007, Rudi Cilibrasi, Ph.D. wrote: Uploaders: Paul van Tilburg [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Is this correct? No, this was just my hope when I first made the package some time ago. But, Paul has no interest or use for the package. Since then, Paul has gotten overworked and also had to finish his thesis; I misunderstood the purpose of the library when I wrote that first description and think it would be better if a real user of the library wrote a description. Probably somebody involved in the nuclear field I guess. I can help with this stuff if the next maintainer wants me to. So this seems to be a missunderstanding of the Uploaders field. In general it is not necessary that a sponsor is mentioned in the debian/control file. He just signs and uploads the package. People mentioned in the Uploaders field are usually those who do some group maintenance i.e. work actively on package development. If I'm sponsoring packages I sometimes ask the maintainer for adding myself to the uploaders field because this ensures that I will find the package listed in http://qa.debian.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED] which enables me to have a quick overview about thoses packages I'm interested in - but this is more than just a simple sponsored upload. I am happy to do this if I am really the best person to, but I have never worked with a X-Ray data file yet successfully. I think Teemu might know better how to describe it. As I just sponsored other packages for Teemu I think this would be a reasonable cooperation. Just come back to me if nobody else will step up as sponsor. (I'm just sponsoring a certain amount of packages and would like to see this as a backup if finding an other sponsor would fail.) Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: libNeXus mostly packaged
On Wed, 23 May 2007, Rudi Cilibrasi, Ph.D. wrote: Here's the quote from the DPM: -- 5.6.3 Uploaders List of the names and email addresses of co-maintainers of the package, if any. If the package has other maintainers beside the one named in the Maintainer fieldhttp://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Maintainer, their names and email addresses should be listed here. The format is the same as that of the Maintainer tag, and multiple entries should be comma separated. Currently, this field is restricted to a single line of data. This is an optional field. -- So, Paul van Tilburg gave me advice when I made the very first versions of this package, and he reviewed it extensively and found many packaging problems and helped me fix them. Therefore, I consider him a co-maintainer. Given the description above, it seems entirely appropriate to list him in the Uploaders: field. In principle it is and considering what you wrote above Paul definitely should gain some appreciation (in changelog, README.Debian, copyright or wherever you feel apropriate). Or have I misunderstood the paragraph above somehow or the idea of package maintanence? I thought it involved the finding and fixing of packaging problems and by that criteria certainly Paul has contributed in the past enough to be worth mentioning I should think. If not then I think we need to clarify the language in the DPM to express why not because I still cannot see it and I suspect others will be confused by this as well. In one of your previous mails you wrote that Paul does not have time / interest to work on this package any more. The Uploaders field should IMHO reflect the current status of people who work on this. It is a technical field that does not just list people that just deserve acknowledge. For this purpose we have free text formated files. So if Paul will continue to work on the package keep him as Uploader if not just leave the field out. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Meshlab and Qutemol
On Sun, 3 Jun 2007, Teemu Ikonen wrote: I've made packages of Meshlab with the relevant parts of the VCG library included in the source (separate packaging does not make much sense ATM, since VCG upstream does not even have a build system). The source package is at http://www.helsinki.fi/~tpikonen/meshlab/ I've found /usr/lib/meshlab/plugins.txt containing Put in this folder your DLL plugin and restart MeshLab Is this really a file that is parsed by the runtime or should this rather be a documentation file? In general I really think there is a bit less documentation (not to mention the missing man pages). For instance what is the sense behind /usr/bin/meshlabserver. From a users point of view I would have no idea where to start with this package. So, if any DD interested in this software is reading this, please help close bug #426581 and sponsor an upload to the archive. Any comments or suggestions for improving the packaging are very much welcome as well. Sponsoring would be no problem, if my brain dead users perspective could be at least a little bit liftet. Thanks for working on this package that seems quite useful obtained from the screen shots from the web page (even if the shots show a strange window manager ;-)). Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[RKI-Spam-Verdacht]Debian-Science at LSM
Hi, I just want to make some advertising for the Libre Software Meeting in Amiens from 10. to 14. July. http://www.rmll.info/?lang=en I'll be there from 9.th July evening to 15. July morning (and will be accompanied by my wife). I hope to meet some Debian people there especially if they are interested in Science. I noticed that in the morning of the day when I have two talks (general CDD and specific one about Debian-Science) there are a bunch of GIS related talks. http://www.rmll.info/rubrique8.html?lang=en see Geomatics - Thursday 12/07 - 09:00 I'll try to talk with them about Debian-GIS. [I kept [EMAIL PROTECTED] in CC because this seems to be the only GIS-related mailinglist in Debian - which should be changed IMHO.] Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 3 developer meetings in Extremadura 2007
On Thu, 5 Jul 2007, Andreas Schuldei wrote: They will arrange travel inside Europe (exceptions exist), hosting and food for max 20 people working on debian projects for a long weekend in the coming half year. http://wiki.debian.org/WorkSessionsExtremadura still holds. Kudos to the Extremadura people! Projects that want to use this great opportunity should create a wiki page with goals for the meeting and a list of attending people (like http://wiki.debian.org/I18n/Extremadura2006 for a good example), set a date that would fit them and contact me and César Gómez Martín, cesar.gomez at gmail dot com cesar.gomez at juntaextremadura dot netÿÿfor further coordination. I started a coordination page for a CDD meeting at http://wiki.debian.org/CustomDebian/Extremadura2007 I personally have no sharp preferences for a meeting date. Currently I have only some dates I would like to exclude: September 8., October 13. and October 31 to November 4. I'd like to hear suggestions for a reasonable date that will enable many interested people to join. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Summary from Libre Software Meeting in Amiens
Hi, when I had my talk about Debian-Science at LSM in Amiens: http://people.debian.org/~tille/talks/200707_lsm_science the discussion brought up some intersting points that might be interesting for all CDDs Jannick Patois proposed a categorisation of quality. It might be reasonable to find simple objective numbers. Here is a summary of Jannick's points (with some additions and hints from myself): - number of users (could be obtained from popularity contest) - number of lines of codes (could be calculated at package building time) - version number (obvious, but should be put on a general stats page) - number of authors / written by a credited institute / used in publications -- duty of documentation of the maintainer - date of last version -- duty of documentation of the maintainer - number of related mailing list and frequency of postings There are several possibilities to store this information that might give users a clue about the value of a certain package. Probably the best way would be a tag in the control file but this will probably not be accepted soon. Perhaps a first shot could be a section in README.Debian of the package. Something, that leaded into this direction is Francescos DebianGis Thermometer under http://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/debiangis-status.html Francesco, where can the code for this can be found? I would regard this a s a really valuable tool for all Custom Debian Distributions. Regarding the categorsiation of avialable Debian packages I decided to just add the missing things to my original slides from the talk. These now do contain some additions for geography and several additions to physics (compared to the slided I used in the talk). The slides are available at http://people.debian.org/~tille/talks/200707_lsm_science/index_en.html (If you want to read the LaTeX source have a look at http://people.debian.org/~tille/talks/200707_lsm_science/science.tex but note the hints at http://people.debian.org/~tille/talks/latex-beamer/index_en.html if you want to compile these yourself. I rather linked the source here for enabling easy cut and paste the dependencies with a text editor instead of wanting you to compile it yourself). This categorisation is kind of a second step to realise meta packages stuff as it was discussed in the thread that started at http://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2007/02/msg00011.html and which ended in a classification Wiki page at http://wiki.debian.org/DebianScienceClassification The idea is that somebody might clean up the wiki page and adds the suggested Depends/Recommends/Suggests to the categories mentioned there. Please don't hesitate to start with this task if you are interested because this would lead to the needed double checking of my suggestion and brings Debian-Science foreward while I'm completely busy with urgend Debian-Med stuff for the next couple of weeks. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Extremadura meeting
Hi, this is a reminder to the possibility of sponsoring traveling and accomodation for EU citizens to meet in Extremadura and to do some serious Debian stuff. There is a web page for a CDD and Science related meeting at. http://wiki.debian.org/CustomDebian/Extremadura2007 I just added a table where interested people should add their prefered date and the task they would like to work on. The question is whether we come up with a separate meeting for CDD and Science stuff or whether we just drop into the Debian-Edu meeting (if there are to less interested people). Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debian-science and science-* packages
On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: On 8/24/07, Frederic Lehobey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have gathered this information (and more) into a temptative debian-science source package building several science-* packages (with cdd-dev machinery). Great! I am unsure if it is ready to be uploaded to unstable. But I would be happy to hear your feedback and suggestions on dependencies to have (or not) and take them into account. http://lehobey.net/debian-science I'll have a look at this in the end of next week. I would like to ask you not to upload to unstable for one reason: I'm in the middle of heavy changes for cdd-dev and thus I would like to upload (and surely test before an upload) after the release of cdd-dev 0.4. I think I will need about one week for finishing and than I will test your work on science. 1) Should these metapackages Recommend instead of Depending on the real ones? I see that is what the education-* metapackages do and presumably they have some reason for it. This will be done automagically by the new cdd-dev package. The reason is that Debian-Edu decided to use only Recommends to be able to remove the meta package (they think it might be needed in some cases). It is no real harm since apt-get now by default installs all recommends and thus all Depends in the tasks are turned to recommends. 2) Maybe these metapackages could Suggest the corresponding education-* metapackages. I see no real advantage in doing so but it also does no harm. 3) science-physics should definitely recommend root-system once that's out of experimental. It can be added to the lÃist of Recommends also now. The cdd-dev build system checks for available packages anyway and it is tunred to a suggests if it is not found in the apt-cache list. Once it is available the next package build will recognise this. Thanks for working on this Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Re: debian-science and science-* packages
On Sun, 26 Aug 2007, Christian Holm Christensen wrote: I think a Recommends would be better than Depends, since that allows one to install, and keep having installed, the meta-packages even if there are problems with the recommended/dependant packages - which does happen in unstable. See me previous comment about new cdd-dev tools. (They just turn Depends in the tasks files into Recommends.) * Perhaps `-physics' should recommend `-statistics'. Well, we will have meta packages that will contain general scientific tools (statistics, typesetting and viewing in the current suggestion) which will probably be usefull in every specific science and that should be in the list of Recommends (or Suggests?). * The `-astronomy' package should also depend on what-ever implementation that exists in Debian of `IDL' (Interactive Data Language). For some odd reason, that language seems popular among astrologists - sorry astronomers :-) I wonder whether it might be reasonable to implement a scheme like science-xand science-x-dev while the later contains developent libraries etc. In this case most probably IDL would go into the science-astronomy-dev dependency list. Thanks for your comments Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Extremadura meeting
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Andreas Tille wrote: this is a reminder to the possibility of sponsoring traveling and accomodation for EU citizens to meet in Extremadura and to do some serious Debian stuff. There is a web page for a CDD and Science related meeting at. http://wiki.debian.org/CustomDebian/Extremadura2007 The table for the organisation of an Extremadura meeting has just grown by one single entry. It would be a shame if we would waste the generous sponsering offer from the government of Extremadura to sponsor travel, accomodation and food to bring us together to get some work done. BTW, while the sponsorship is ofr EU citizens only the DPL mentioned that it might be possible to get some funding for non-EU citizens if there are good reasons for it. IMHO this would be a great opportunity to strengthen our team by a dedicated face-to-face meeting and pushing foreward Debian-Med and Debian-Science issues. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debian-science and science-* packages
On Tue, 28 Aug 2007, Christian Holm Christensen wrote: The problem could be, that `-physics' is just a tad too broad - maybe (and only maybe) it needs to be split up into parts (-nanoscience, -hep, -theory, -bio, -solid, ...) with some `-physics-common' recommended We all know that every science has several flavours. If you want to reflact this in meta packages we will end up with many meta packages with zero to two dependant packages which just makes no sense at all. Just live with some extra installed packages after installing a general science-physics package or remove the unneeded stuff afterwards. On the other hand we could also use the DebTAGS mechanism more aggressively. Sure - did you start debtagging your favourite package? Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Developer meeting in Extremadura: 17.-21.10.2007
Hi, on behalf of the organiser César Gómez Martín I would like to collect the following data from those people that would like to work in the field of Custom Debian Distributions in generel, Debian-Science and Debian-Med. The information that is needed is: - the preferred airport or airports of origin - the passport number (to book the flights) - the name exactly as it is on the passport Because César needs this information at the end of this week make sure that you send this to me until Friday MORNING because my DSL is broken and it might happen that I wolöl be off-line from Friday noon. :-( See you in the city of Mérida Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Re: Debian Edu Meeting minutes 20071008
[debian-science list in CC because of Extremadura topic] On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Ronny Aasen wrote: DebianEdu/Meeting/20071008 I missed an announcement on debian-edu list for the meeting. I would think that would be alsways a good idea because there are people out there who are very seldomly lurking on IRC and do not follow Wiki changes (at least I do fit this criteria). (There is no practical in this case for me because I would probably not have attended anyway.) * extremadura Holger created a prelimary schedule [1] We can use it to plan events/talks for extremadura. It's also wanted that everyone update their arrivaltime in the wiki [2] [1] http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/Extremadura2007/Schedule I'd volunteer to organise the workshop. Topics: * current status of cdd-dev * how to quickly build meta packages for a cdd at the example of Debian-Edu * Ideas for the future * Settle on one way of spelling Debian Edu Bug #1237 [1] is resolved. It was setteled to use the most 'English' way of writing. So we urge everyone to try and be consistent in writing and translations. Use Debian Edu in written text, and DebianEdu in URL's and other places where spaces are not desireable. This is interesting. Are there any documents about what means proper English spelling? This would also concern Debian-Med (which is currently spelled this way). Kind regards and thanks for the minutes Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Script to generate live CDs
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: PS: BTW, id deborphan really needed? I thought aptitude would be superior? Not sure. I like it, and do not know how to easily get a list of 'leaf' packages in the dependency graph using aptitude. Forget my hint. My mind was reading debfoster - deborphan is fine and I use it personally quite regularly but inside a script and thus even nearly forgot the name. See you Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: open source image matching software
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Andreas Hirczy wrote: You might try ImgSeek http://www.imgseek.net/ Or rather $ apt-cache show imgseek ... even if I think findimagedupes is your friend. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web pages showing tasks
Hi, some people might be aware that there is an effort to build some meta packages foe a debian-science CDD. At the extremadura workshop last October Frederic Daniel Luc Lehobey [EMAIL PROTECTED] and Dominique Belhachemi [EMAIL PROTECTED] did some effort to create http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/cdd/projects/science/trunk/debian-science/?rev=0sc=0 The webtools that were developed by David Paleino [EMAIL PROTECTED] and me do allow to draw some nice information pages about the tasks of a CDD and I did a first atempt to build debian-science tasks pages using the SVN code. The result can be seen at http://cdd.alioth.debian.org/science/tasks/ Well, it says it is the list of tasks of Debian-Med but this is because I quickly copied the Debian-Med stuff. It is just some work to do to make the scripts flexible enough for all CDDs because they were developped by David for Debian-Med in the first place. Now I'm busy to make it more flexible for other CDDs as well. If yoou want to fix the pages you have several chances: 1) Go to /srv/alioth.debian.org/chroot/home/groups/cdd/htdocs/science and enhcance the PHP code. 2) Fix Homepage not available statements by fixing the packages that are missing a proper Homepage tag or fix other issues you might find in the package description. 3) Read http://people.debian.org/~tille/cdd/ch-sentinel.en.html#s-packageslist to learn more about prospective packages and enhance the tasks files in Debian-Science SVN (see above). What do you think about this stuff? Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [DebianGIS] Web pages showing tasks
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008, Hamish wrote: that is quite simple (including backports.org), just add a link to: http://packages.debian.org/package name the name can even be sloppy, e.g. http://packages.debian.org/gdal I dont's think so. IMHO the link should only be added if the package really exists in backports which requires scanning the Sources / Packages file from there which is not yet done. (I don't say that it is much effort but it is just not done because I do not regard this as high priority - volunteers are welcome as always...) Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [DebianGIS] Web pages showing tasks
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote: Well, linking is the easiest way, I would prefer a summary page because it is more useful that looking every project on the general packages.debian.org or packages.qa.debian.org site. About that I would think some web services which can be used to return specific information in well formed XML for the packages.* sites... Something that bugs.d.o already does, but I dunno if it is also available for other sites. Surely much better than re-inventing the wheel each time... Well, I don't think that at the suggested page something is reinvented. (Feel free to prove me wrong - I would hate to reinvent anything.) IMHO there is no such think like an overview about descriptions of a certain subset of packages that exist and that _not_ _yet_ exists in Debian. While you could probably get the descriptions of the existing packages from some XML service (which would be a nice thing) I doubt that this service will be expanded to DDTP translations - which is really high on my agenda because if we could have the descriptions translated for our target users we could start claiming this is user friendly. For the other pages that are used in Debian-Med David is using some services - but I can not comment on this until I have revised the code. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: pkg-science, again
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: This group could take inspiration from pkg-scicomp or debian-med to create his own policy (goals are very similar to pkg-scicomp). I'm a little bit concerned about the nomen est omen _pkg_-science and _pkg_scicomp. IMHO we need more than just packaging random scientific software. What Debian-Med does and what a CDD really makes is forming a community around the software in the focused area, try to teach them, building a network of cooperatioen etc. It is not only a technical thing like pure packaging. It is about making Debian the distribution of choice for scientists. Kind regards Andreas, -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: pkg-science, again
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, David Bremner wrote: Well, perhaps, but: - This is the naming convention suggested by the alioth guidelines on the wiki[1], however authorative those are. Mind you, this is a bit self referential, since these are the guidelines for packaging projects Which is exactly my point: I would love to see the Debian-Science effort to be _more_ than a packaging project. Packaging software is one important part but it needs more than adding single packages to the Debian pool to make Debian really attractive for scientists. I'm speaking from my own experience with the Debian-Med project that evolved from a one-ma-project taking over some biomedicine packages that were available in Debian and adding some more to a group that on the one hand adds more and more packages to the pool, but in addition: - cares for QA issues of the related packages by developping useful QA tools - works together to convince upstream to use free licenses - argues with authors of scientific software to reduce the number of forks - takes part in conferences and reports about this effort - etc. Isn't it science to see the whole picture instead of only tiny bits (like single packages)? Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: pkg-science, again
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
I think everybody agree on this. However, we have to start somewhere and
starting to add some interesting packages could be a good way to begin
and to interest people to this project, don't you think ?
Well, we might be much farther away. I guess you will find some hits
if you search for my name and the term custom debian distribution (or CDD)
in the archive of this list. It's not that I did not made some suggestions
that would lead to a wider scope - it just lacks some willingness / time
to work on it.
I don't know the software David is talking about (sketch, bibutils and
vrr), but software that Adam is packaging (OpenCascade, Code_Aster and
Salomé) deserve to be in pkg-sci{ence,comp}.
As I said - I'm not against packaging scientific software.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Re: [DebianGIS] Web pages showing tasks
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote: Isn't that eligible for adding interesting features for all CDD in SoC 2008? In that case I could volunteer as a mentor for both PHP/Perl addons and patches. Actually it is exactly my plan to propose this for GSoC and I would also volunteer to mentor this. Perhaps we should work together to work this out. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [DebianGIS] Web pages showing tasks
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: See URL: http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-grass/packages/debian-gis . There is source for a meta package, as well as rules to build a live CD. Just added the location to the update-tasks script that builds the web page. I' will try to clean up debian-science first (there is nothing I could break for the moment), then I will have a look at Debian-Edu and Debian-GIS). Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFC: wnpp bugs tagging
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008, Luca Brivio wrote: I'd strongly vote for using debian-science list as the user because IMHO we need a specific group of Debian maintainers who care about this specific topic and this brings things in focus on the right list. You might have a look at the CDD documentation how to ITP[1]. Well, you can guess my purpose is slightly different, say Debian-wide, as tags I've listed show. Yes, but you was posting to debian-science list and because I assumed you did this on purpose instead of posting to debian-devel I gave a comment from my debian-science perspective. Therefore i think different users can be suitable to different purposes. I've listed show. Therefore i think different users can be suitable to different purposes. I just learned that RFPs are most promising if you try to reach people who have a direct interest in the topic of the package. So if I would like to RFP a game I would foreward this to a games related mailing list, if the package is about science I try to inform debian-science and if it is about medicine/biology I try to involve people reading debian-med mailing list. It is a question of pushing the information to a place where it might be relevant. If you think the package is relevant on more than one mailing list, keep both CCed. I'm not sure the latter couldn't be the case. For instance, I might help with tags, when I'm not really too busy. Of course we'd need an easy way to track ITPs and RFPs. Hmmm, perhaps I missed the point in your original mail, but I thought qour intention would be tagging the ITP/RFP bugs. Until now, I've been adding software to DebianScience* wiki pages, like Charles often did. If I understood Charles right he just used the Wiki because it was much easier to keep up to date than the wml in Debian web CVS. Since there is a chance to auto generate up to date pages easily form a single source of information (the tasks files) he agreed to use this because it seems to me the most efficient way to present all our knowledge about software we have and we would like to have. Anyway if I can help doing simple things, I will, as far as I have time. Well, checking WNPP for ITPs/RFPs that are relevant for debian-science sounds simple and at least forewarding this to the list is easy. I must learn to use Subversion, too. :-) Well, a patch is welcome too, but SVN is not that hard to learn. (Trust me, I was reluctant myself. ;-) ) Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Extremadura 2008 Debian Work Meeting from 2.4 - 6.4
Hi, as you might have read [1] there are Extremadura Debian Work Meetings scheduled also for this year. Yesterday the Debian-Edu people got the information [2] that there is a slot from April 2nd to April 6th. I talked to Andreas Schuldei whether Debian-Med, Debian-Science and general CDD people might be able to join this meeting and he agreed depending from the amount of people who take part in vcs-pkg which runs in parallel. For simplicity we will not create a separate Wiki page to list the participiants of other CDDs but just add the names to http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/Extremadura2008 (where you just can read my name). Please make sure you state clearly What do you want to do and make sure that you are able to give a report what you have really _done_ afterwards. Then send a mail to Patrick as described in [2]. See you in extremadura Andreas. [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2008/02/msg3.html [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-edu/2008/03/msg00089.html -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Extremadura Meeting Subscription Deadline (fwd)
Hi, just to keep you up to date with the deadline. Extremadura meetings are a really good oportunity to get some work done. You do not have to care about travel, a place to sleep and food - just work. If this is right for you, just apply now. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- Forwarded message -- Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 21:59:37 +0100 From: Patrick Winnertz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Extremadura Meeting Subscription Deadline Resent-Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 21:00:47 + (UTC) Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hello Fellow Developers! Stockholm told me just a few minutes ago that there is a quite short deadline for Subscription to the Extremadura Meeting in April (2.4 - 6.4 ). Please note that I badly need your informations until 16.3.08 20.00 UTC. This informations are: Your Name Your Passport ID The airport you want to travel from Please provide the informations (except the Passport ID) also on this website [1]. I'll write a private email to everybody who subscribed, but doesn't provide a passport ID yet on Friday evening. This informations are needed by Cesar to book the flights. Please note that it is this year not longer possible to book the flights on your own and get it refunded.: Extremadura prevers this year to buy them. Thanks in advance! I'm looking forward to meet you there again! Greetings Winnie [1]: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/Extremadura2008 -- .''`. Patrick Winnertz [EMAIL PROTECTED] : :' : GNU/Linux Debian Developer `. `'` http://www.der-winnie.de http://people.skolelinux.org/~winnie `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Science at DebConf 8 and DevCamp?
On Mon, 31 Mar 2008, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: If I am approved, I'll be there as a volunteer. I'm not a DD :-) There is no need to be a DD to do a lot of reasonable work. Moreover staying at DebConf is the best opportunity to get your key signed which is a precondiction to become a DD/DM. Make sure you are carrying your passport and lots of printouts of your fingerprint ... :) Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Re: Another bibliography management software.
On Thu, 1 May 2008, Bryan Bishop wrote: On Wednesday 30 April 2008, Charles Plessy wrote: http://gpapers.org/ Added to svn://svn.debian.org/cdd/projects/science/trunk/debian-science/tasks/typesetting to make sure that this hint will not be forgotten. It shows up at http://cdd.alioth.debian.org/science/tasks/typesetting.php#gpapers I shamelessly use this chance to advertise some work of Frederic Lehobey who worked on the Debian-Science CDD. If you like to work on these tasks packages and want to see how the result becomes renderes have a look at http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/Extremadura2008/WebSentinelHowto Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Another bibliography management software.
On Fri, 2 May 2008, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: Who is actually maintaining the science/tasks pages? The tasks files can be modified by every member of the Custom Debian Distributions Alioth group: https://alioth.debian.org/projects/cdd/ I see in the Mathematics page [1] that octave2.1 is cited instead of octave3.0 but it should be the other way around. I guess the entry in the mathematics task was based on the wrong assumption that there is a package octave which depends from the latest version that is declared as default by the octave packaging team. Thus the tasks file said Recommends: octave | octave2.1 because there is no such package octave in the Debian pool, this page [1] http://cdd.alioth.debian.org/science/tasks/mathematics.php shows only the existing package Octave2.1. My quick fix was to replace this by octave3.0. Unfortunately this will be break once the next Octave version hits the Debian archive. So you should consider filing a bug or simply talk to the Octave packaging team to provide a package that always depends from the latest stable version. Examples are for instance the python and the postgresql-server package. Thanks for the hint Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Another bibliography management software.
On Fri, 2 May 2008, Leopold Palomo Avellaneda wrote: svn://svn.debian.org/cdd/projects/science/trunk/debian-science/tasks/typese tting please could you add Tellico? we have debian package and works very well. It's a generic collection program but it also generate bib files, Lynx bib entry and openoffice bib entries. I went for a suggests for the moment. The effect for the resulting web page is equal (for the moment until I found the time to implement a more sophisticated system to separate Recommends from Suggests) but for the future meta packages I'd regard it better to only suggest such generic packages to not just fill users harddiscs with packages they might not need. Also you could create a collection of books from several databases and generate the bib file. And could scan a directory with pdfs and create a database of entries. No, sorry, I can not. I have no motivation to spend my spare time on this. But if you think this might be a useful enhancement for Debian users why don't you do it and ask here whether we just could build a package from it? Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processing of blitz++_0.9-8_i386.changes (fwd)
Hi, I just want to inform you that I now took over fully the libblitz++ package because markos retired from his Debian maintainership. I cared for the last couple of uploads and was listed as Uploader so I felt that it would be reasonable to take over maintainership. On the other hand I would prefer team maintenance and I think in the Debian Science team chances might be good to find coworkers. Just drop me a note if you are interested. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- Forwarded message -- Date: Mon, 05 May 2008 10:44:22 + From: Archive Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Processing of blitz++_0.9-8_i386.changes blitz++_0.9-8_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: blitz++_0.9-8.dsc blitz++_0.9-8.diff.gz libblitz-doc_0.9-8_all.deb libblitz0ldbl_0.9-8_i386.deb libblitz0-dev_0.9-8_i386.deb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DPL teams review 2008
On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Steve McIntyre wrote: The first thing I promised to do when I became DPL was to initiate a thorough review of Debian's teams. Well, no time like the present! I just answered your mail to Debian Med team. For the record and readers of CDD list it is archived here: http://lists.debian.org/debian-med/2008/04/msg00082.html Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Science linguistics and debian-science SVN repository at alioth
On Tue, 6 May 2008, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: There is still the pkg-science group under Alioth which aims to do that too. If you want, I can give you the admin rights. Ahh, that's probably a good idea. Well, we probably do not need two competing VCS. It would be great if you could add me to the members (probably upload rights is enough). BTW, what do you think about a deeper structure inside the SVN as I suggested in my mail? Is there any group policy comparable to the one which was written for Debian Med http://debian-med.alioth.debian.org/docs/policy.html Kind regards Andreas. PS: IMHO there is no need to post this in private and thus I CC the list to inform others. (I hope you forgive of violating the netiquette to quote your private mail.) -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Octave in debian-science tasks
On Tue, 6 May 2008, Frederic Lehobey wrote: There is a virtual package provided by octave2.1, octave2.9, octave3.0: http://packages.debian.org/sid/octave Sorry, I missed that. Recommends: octave | octave3.0 Definitely (just commited) to recover the above effect (if I am not wrong). No, you are not wrong and probably you should assume this for the future and just check in your good ideas. ;-)) Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Science linguistics and debian-science SVN repository at alioth
On Tue, 6 May 2008, Christophe Prud'homme wrote: I agree. Is it not the same idea as the pkg-science team started by Sylvestre Ledru (package there what is not more suitable somewhere else like in DebiChem, pkg-scicomp, Debian Med, etc.)? I would suggest pkg-scicomp which seems more suite for the task. Uhm, now I'd rather stick to my suggestion to have a debian-science repository - just for the fun to have yet another atempt to get people under one umbrella. :-( Honestly, I don't mind about the name of the repro and pkg-scicomp seems to have gathered much more stuff then pkg-science. So what about moving the three packages from pkg-science to pkg-scicomp close pkg-science and turn pkg-scicomp into a more structured repository featuring a policy as a reference for newcommers (like me who are obviosely confused)? Kind regards Andreas. http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Science linguistics and debian-science SVN repository at alioth
On Tue, 6 May 2008, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: The only problem with this solution is the name pkg-scicomp (scientific computing) which is too specific. Many software won't fit into this title. Well, I perfectly understand your intend but finally I don't care about a name but about work getting done. Naming discussions tend to show a color-of-the-bikeshed [1] feature. I admit that proper names are sometimes really important and I personally are fighting desperately for finding a proper name for CDD[2] but I would like to see the current situation between the two SVN repositories that we have one (non-optimal but non-harmful) historical name for a repository and the _Title_ and _Abstract_ could be clarified in a describing text. Moreover I would regard it as optimal if the location of this SVN would be linked at the description page of this mailing list to leave some trace for people like me who did not know about both (which is my fault for sure because as a subscriber from the beginning I should have knowed, but I don't read every single mail ...). As I said - I care more of the structure of the repository which tends to grow quite flat currently than to what nametag is attached to it. Kind regards Andreas. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_of_the_bikeshed [2] http://wiki.debian.org/CDDNamingProposals [3] http://lists.debian.org/debian-science/ -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Science linguistics and debian-science SVN repository at alioth
On Tue, 6 May 2008, David Bremner wrote: Speaking as the maintainer of all packages in pkg-science ( all 3 :-) ), I don't mind any sort of merging plan. That's good. ;-) But I understood from previous mails from C. Prudhomme that he (and others?) preferred to keep pkg-scicomp a more focussed effort on scientific computation (in the computer science usage of that term). Couldn't this be apprached by using a subdirectory computation ? That's what I mean with structure. (BTW, would libblitz++ fit into this field or not?) I also have some trouble to draw a really good borderline between computation and other fields of science. If that is an accurate statement (Christophe?) then using pkg-science as the umbrella group seems to be consistent with the original intent. It is not completely reasonable to compare the activity in pkg-scicomp and pkg-science since the latter is much younger. Well, as I said several times: I don't care about the name. I would like to see a common repository for people who feel at home here on this list. If it makes more sense to move those scicomp packages to a common repository it is fine for me as well - there is just more work to do in this case which might be a show stopper to get it completed. I just have a problem to decide what belongs to scicomp and what not and thus I would simply broaden the meaning. An alternative approcah would be to declare scicomp as a separate project in comparison to DebiChem and Debian-GIS which is a clearly structured group that handles in their own field and properly group maintains their packages. This would come close to my overall goal to create specific teams for every science which might end in an autonomous CDD. My view on Debian-Science is to give those sciences a home that are sparse regarding man power to maintain their own healthy project. In my view Biology, Chemestry and Geographical Information Systems just reached these goal and I would be happy if we could release more and more children out of the common home to grow up independently. If the latter is the case for SciComp I would like to learn more about it, which is the exact scope, are there any subtopics, who are the members of the team, etc. If there is to be any sort of reorganization, let me put in a plea for git (hg or bzr are probably also lovely, but I already more or less understand git) as VCS. svn-buildpackage is the suxors when not connected to the internet, and these days my out-of-office internet access is via GPRS (not even 3G). But honestly, I can live with svn if I have to. Tool flamewars are for losers :-). I was about to write in my initial mail that I would like to stay those VCS flamers out of the way if they don't are willing to do the work but just want to advertise their pet VCS. If you are the one who just did the work and decide for git it is fine for me. (Well, I'm perfectly new to git, but have heard good things and don't want to block progress - but I would hate a flamewar between SVN superior VCSs.) So if people agree: Yes we should focus on a common VCS and we want to maintain packages as a group in this repository and your are doing the work to implement it it is your choice (Debian is a DoOcracy). I just want to hear the point of the SciComp crew first whether they feel happy with this move or whether they are some kind of grown up child out of the Debian Science home which works separately on its own (and I wish good luck for this). Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Science linguistics and debian-science SVN repository at alioth
On Tue, 6 May 2008, Ross Boylan wrote: Well, I perfectly understand your intend but finally I don't care about a name but about work getting done. I understand the sentiment, but in this case think the opposition is a false one. If people with scientific, but not computer-scientific, software to package think pkg-scicomp is not for them, they'll go somewhere else. I think your remark is very sensible and as I said I'm beaten myself hardly with a bad name Custom Debian Distributions [1] I regard your input as important even if Rudi Cilibrasi does not share your point from a linguistic point of view. That will impede coordinated effort. I don't know how likely that is to happen, but it seems enough of a chance to be a little careful with the name. So I try to come back to my original proposal debian-science. I also do not really like the 'pkg' in the name (even if I could live with it). IMHO Debian and thus Debian Science is more than just packaging stuff - it is about supporting users by providing some good infrastructure including documentation web pages etc. Well, packaging is the most important part of this - but it is not everything and in so far the name part 'pkg' might be missleading as well. That's the reason for the Debian Med SVN layout featuring packages and community[2]. I wouldn't call Debian Med SVN as a good example to adopt because we are thinking about a restructuring - but the issue to include packaging and other things into the SVN reflects the reality better and should be applied in any form. So back to the main issue: IMHO we need a well structured common repository for the work of the Debian Science Team. I'd regard taking over pkg-scicomp as the fastest way to approach this because there is some content that would need a change which needs acceptance of the former providers of this content (who do not seem to be very active in this discussion unfortunately). But itaking over pkgscicomp is actually the quick-n-dirty approach and if you think that this is the wrong way I would be happy if David Bremner would start on realising what he suggested in his last mail (and leave him the decision to continue with pkg-science or just start from scratch with debian-science). I also have a question about WordNet. I know in the past there was an issue with package what were essentially large databases (I think that may have come up for astronomical and geographic data). Would that be an issue for Wordnet? Not that I know of. The term large is relative and WordNet is not THAT large that it should be an issue. There are other package inside Debian that ship ten times larger data packages. Kind regards Andreas. [1] http://wiki.debian.org/CDDNamingProposals [2] http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/debian-med/trunk/?rev=0sc=0 -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Science linguistics and debian-science SVN repository at alioth
On Tue, 6 May 2008, Rudi Cilibrasi wrote: Wow, small world! I have been very interested in WordNet for years and in fact it has been a major (but relatively unpublished) and recurring interest in my own personal computational linguistics research. I have made first the popular poetry generation programs using wordnet, and then later wrote programs to search through the network of synsets for shortest paths to try to glean meaning from text computationally.Thanks for maintaining this important package, it has been extremely important in my development and I am not alone in saying the WordNet package was one of the most inspiring things to happen in computational linguistics in the 90's. I'd welcome team maintenance as I said... ;-) (BTW, currently I have some changes regarding tcl/tk 8.5 on my local disc which will be uploaded in the near future. About the pkg-scicomp version pkg-science debate, I must admit that to me it is an abuse of English to suggest that pkg-scicomp is somehow reasonably distinct in meaning from pkg-science. To me, pkg-scicomp is about Scientific Computation. I _personally_ agree, but the to me in your sentence is cruxial. I had to learn that so many people have different perceptions about things and it should be a warning for us if the issue is even brought up on this list. Very often confused users do _not_raise their voice and thus we have to assume at least 10 users who have the same naming problem for every single poster here. But at this stage I think Debian is having some flexibility issues and we are sort of stuck unable to refactor our team organization this year so far. ... this year has a DebConf to come and I will be active on this front ... I still think it is important and overdue and would welcome new shared repository focus. That's why I'm checking the situation _now_ to be prepared and know the issues to solve for DebConf. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debian and robotics
On Wed, 7 May 2008, Leopold Palomo Avellaneda wrote: The robotics area is very wide. To many kind of packages could go there, You should probably come up with a list of these many packages to gain the interest of people here. so, depends on the people, the interest, etc the idea could be possible or not. The idea is always possible. ;-) The question is rather whether enough people are willing to do the grunt work. With the Debian Med project I gained the experience that starting with real work and presenting something that exists is the best way to convince people to join the project. The amount of work I had to do for this project convinced me, that engaging in one CDD is work enough to not start another one myself - so I can hopefully be helpful but not on the top of the activities for some other CDD. (As a physicist by profession I would feel competent for a Debian Physics CDD but I stay away from this job for simple time limitations.) Also, I don't know how to put this in a debian-scince cdd. I would strongly advise to start with a tasks file inside debian-science like you can find in the SVN at svn://svn.debian.org/cdd/projects/science/trunk/debian-science/tasks Just follow the scheme of the other tasks files and add the packages you consider relevant. This might be a good test case whether there is really enough stuff for a separate Debian Robotics. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
{debian,pkg}-science repository [Was: Science linguistics and debian-science SVN repository at alioth]
On Tue, 6 May 2008, David Bremner wrote: If there is to be any sort of reorganization, ... So well, David, no answers from pkg-scicomp so far. I do not really know what this means, but I think we should not let the activity boil down. Would you take over the job to restructure either pkg-science or start a debian-science repository? I leave the choice of the name to you and also the VCS system you prefer. Just let something happen and lets move on. I will personally not work on the infrastructure itself for time constraints but I'm keen to check in some package of mine and want to enable the options for others to join a team. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: {debian,pkg}-science repository [Was: Science linguistics and debian-science SVN repository at alioth]
On Thu, 8 May 2008, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: We could wait a few days more. Surely we could, but I'm learned in the past that some days tend to increase to some weeks while the number some is stretched in the same way then the time unit. They are doing a nice and important work. No doubt about this. The problem is doing good work without trying to get people involved by writing at least minimum documentation to enable people to join is not a good idea. A *very* short e-mail in this thread with a thumbs up or down for using pkg-scicomp to realise the plan here would be enough to keep things going. I can also help if needed and I care about the VCS. That's great. We are in need of people who are doing the actual infrastructure work. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debian and robotics
On Thu, 8 May 2008, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote: Well, I'm working in an specific field of the robotics. But for example the list could have: - rtai - xenomai RTOS, both in debian now. - rtnet, not in debian. Modules to have real time extension to the network. - orocos, with debian packages but not in debian - orca, not in debian - roboop not in debian - opencv , in debian - comedi, in debian ... maybe a bit old? - octave, coin3d, vtk, gnuplot, boost, opende in debian For collision detection, I think we have nothing. Maybe, - d-collide Also all the typical apps for the scientific write. Well, I tried to turn this list into code which is available at http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/cdd/projects/robotics/trunk/debian-robotics/tasks/?rev=0sc=0 Please note: I will _NOT_ continue this work. It might serve as a kick start for you. You can bother me with questions. Several answers to this questions should be given in the CDD paper[1] and if you prefer examples over documantation just look at debian-science or debian-med at the same location as above. Once I see that the tasks files are growing I will be happy to add the remaining formalism to finalise the work on this. Feel free to tell me your alioth user name to add you to the CDD group in SVN which grants you write permissions. Kind regards Andreas. [1] http://people.debian.org/~tille/cdd/ -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: {debian, pkg}-science repository [Was: Science linguistics and debian-science SVN repository at alioth]
On Thu, 8 May 2008, Bryan Bishop wrote: Hey there; if I wanted to get started with the a list of related projects and the programs to be categorized in some ontology on the wiki, where would I start? I think starting with a Wiki is the wrong approach because it becomes outdated very quickly. We made the experience in the Debian Med team where at first we listed our relevant packages on static pages which turned out to be unmaintainable. Somebody started a competing Wiki and it turned out that both competing techniques were featuring different content (something was missing on any page) and so both techniques failed to stay up to date with the evolution of the Debian pool. The final solution we really found is an automatik update of web pages (twice a day). The web pages for the Debian Med team are controlled by so called tasks files that contain all software (not only existing Debian packages) that is known to us and might be interesting for the project. I it happens that some developer builds a package for Debian and it hits the Debian pool the automatic script will detect this change and thus the resulting web page becomes up to date just in time. IMHO there is no other chance to track down the changes. You can have a look on this at http://debian-med.alioth.debian.org/tasks/ I'm constantly busy to enhance the script and some very interesting features (like translations using DDTP stuff) are on my todo list. The script works as well for Debian Edu, Debian Science and Debian GIS - I just pointed in the past to the links and I can repeat if needed, but currently there is no cronjob installed. (If there is a volunteer to install the cron job - just go for it! I for myself would put some more effort in the script itself before installing a general cron job - but if anybody likes the current state - there is nothing against it.) What sources would I trudge through to find this information? http://people.debian.org/~tille/cdd/ I'd be interested in doing a broad review of all debian-science software packages in the repo, What about http://cdd.alioth.debian.org/science/tasks/ I would be VERY keen on hearing your opinion what you think needs enhancement and in which direction you would change this. but know that apt-cache search science will not bring up everything. Apt-cache can't do this job because it is not made for it. You might try ept-cache search science (the 'e' is no typo!!). It is based on DebTags and this might be your other chance if you are interested in an ontology. It might be that we try to work out some means to generate / complete the currently static tasks files from DebTags. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: {debian, pkg}-science repository [Was: Science linguistics and debian-science SVN repository at alioth]
On Thu, 8 May 2008, Ross Boylan wrote: packagesearch should be useful. But sounds also quite incomplete. I tested seeking Biology where I know a lot of relevant packages but it brought up not nearly half the relevant packages (even if it featured one that was new to me which made the hint helpful ;-)). Do you have an idea on which technique packagesearch is based on? Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: {debian,pkg}-science repository [Was: Science linguistics and debian-science SVN repository at alioth]
On Fri, 9 May 2008, Manuel Prinz wrote: I'm probably offline until Monday but would volunteer to get the repository installed and set up. I guess I can report back on Wednesday next week latest, if that's considered a reasonable time frame. Sure. I'll have a closer look but at the first glace it looks sensible. I just do not see a good reason what the reasoning behind the mathematics-dev task is. The rationale behind the science-mathematics-dev package is that we do not want to flood users hard disk with lots of development stuff if he only wants to use some mathematical applications. So this is a practical reason for the meta packages. There is no such reason for the repository and I don't think it makes sense to stick to this for the VCS hierarchy. That's what I meant when I wrote you should feel free to change things you don't feel reasonable. Or why other tasks do not have a corresponding section. Also practical metapackage reasons: There are just no so much other -dev packages so they do not need a separate meta package. But IMHO this meta package considerations are void for the VSC hierarchy (in contrary it might be even a bad idea to implement this 1:1) because we need a structure according sciences to attract the right experts. The developers who are working with the repository are expected to know themselves which package is development related and which not. Could you please give a short comment on that, please? Thanks in advance! Hope this clarifies things. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Another bibliography management software.
On Fri, 9 May 2008, Antonio Paiva wrote: Just thought remembered today that all of you latex users (like me) would like to know about latexdiff (http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/support/latexdiff/). Added to debian-science/tasks/typesetting which is rendered at http://cdd.alioth.debian.org/science/tasks/typesetting.php to make sure we will not forget this interesting hint until somebody found the time to package this useful tool. Thanks for the hint Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: {debian,pkg}-science repository [Was: Science linguistics and debian-science SVN repository at alioth]
On Fri, 9 May 2008, Daniel Leidert wrote: package1/trunk/ package1/branches/ package2/trunk/ package2/branches/ [..] tags/package1/ tags/package2/ And finally write down this in a policy document to keep people informed ... This is forgotten to often, unfurtunately. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Alioth project to use is pkg-science
On Sun, 11 May 2008, Raphael Hertzog wrote: I rejected your debian-science project request because I simply don't see the point of it compared to the existing pkg-science. You can do much more than packaging even behind the pkg-science umbrella. I agre, that you perfectly can do a lot of things under any umbrella but previous experience showed that it is hard to explain to newcommers what we want and what we do, if a name is descriptive per se but does not describe the right thing. Newcomers tend to blindly guess what the name means and thus it should not be missleading. pkg-science is just a Unix group associated to the resources that you have available on alioth.debian.org, you're free to use the name Debian Science in all the rest of your communication... Furthermore AFAIK [EMAIL PROTECTED] never marketed itself as a custom Debian distribution It is my declared intend to do exactly this because I regard a list that just discusses random issues of packaging scientific software as to less to tackle the main target, which IMHO is making Debian the distribution of choice for scientists. and as such a debian-science name is not really warranted. Even if I'm busy enough with Debian Med issues I would love to bring in all my experiences running a CDD and try to form a CDD team here on this list which warrants the Debian Science name. I just had two talks about a Debian Science CDD which gathered serious interest. In the CDD repository do exist sources for meta packages at http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/cdd/projects/science/trunk/debian-science/?rev=0sc=0 which are not yet released and I'm unsure whether they will hit Lenny right in time, but on the basis of this work some preliminary auto generated web pages at http://cdd.alioth.debian.org/science/tasks/ are builded. So things are beginning to change and the thread starting at http://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2008/05/msg00022.html (which is a little bit longish and drifts in different directions) leaded to the agreement that pkg-sci* is probably not the best name for what we want. And pkg-* is the norm for Alioth projects that deal mainly with packaging. This is right but we cactually want to do more than mainly packaging which is exactly the reason for asking for a new name. What I see here is a lot of pointless discussions and lack of some leadership to take a decision. This is perfectly correct. Missing leadership is a problem in Debian Science but I'm optimistic that this can be solved. I will definitely not take over leadership of a second CDD but will try to support decision makers inside the project with all my experience I made. I'm very optimistic that something will grow from the current situation and I will smoothen the path to establish a fully grown CDD at DebConf 8. I hope that you can live with this decision (that I took in the place of your group since there was no clear consensus). If in the end, if you really decide together you want to get debian-science instead of pkg-science, I'd ask you to open a support request ticket to resurrect debian-science and delete pkg-science at the same time and I'd like this request to be sponsored by two Debian developers to show there's some momentum behind this rename. This is exactly the plan and I would support this (you've got one of the two DD's ;-)). Now please contentrate on real work instead of discussing the group name. :-) This is a sane advise and I perfectly agree that seeking for names is one of the most disgusting things that steal work time from people. I hope I made this clear enough in my postings. But from my point of view enough people voted for debian-science in the end of the thread which I would regard as a decision. Thanks for maintaining alioth Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Alioth project to use is pkg-science
On Tue, 13 May 2008, Raphael Hertzog wrote: Okay, I resurrected debian-science... and I added all pkg-science users to the new project. Now please move everything from the pkg-science project to the debian-science project and tell me when I can remove pkg-science. Thanks for the prompt reaction. I created as SVN repo for debian-science, if you need another kind of repo, please ask. So either Git addictives start action or lets move current svn first quickly and than migrate in the new project. I would hate to disappoint Raphael who had valid concerns in the first place and we told him they are void ... Kind regards and thanks for maintaining alioth Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debian and robotics
On Mon, 12 May 2008, Leopold Palomo Avellaneda wrote: Once I see that the tasks files are growing I will be happy to add the remaining formalism to finalise the work on this. Feel free to tell me your alioth user name to add you to the CDD group in SVN which grants you write permissions. lepalom-guest Added to CDD group. I don't understand the -guest. -guest is attached to all user names if the user is no official Debian developer. In case you would pass the Debian New Maintainer queue you would get an account without guest attached. The idea that I have in mind is to have to have a collection of packages in the robotics area, co-maintained under the umbrella of a group. I don't know if it could be some kind of : apt-get install debian-robotics Well, the idea of Custom Debian Distributions is to support specialized user environments. One part of doing so is to create so called meta packages (see CDD paper [1]) which simplify the installation of a set of packages that are useful to solve a certain task in this field of specialisation. So even if the Project is called Debian Robotics the meta packages are typically called robotics-task1 robotics-task2 ... But the Debian GIS people currently also do have stuff for only one single meta package gis-workstation - which is perfectly valid. Also, looking the repository, I think that robotics should go under debian-science and not at the same level IMHO. Well, exactly this is my advise for not fully grown CDDs in preparation as you might call this. Stay under the umbrella of a larger Debian Science CDD is a good idea if you are lacking man power or if there are just to view packages available to make a big fuzz about it. On the other hand we currently you mentioned three tasks for the robotics field (collision-detection, common, typesetting) and the current technique is not able to handle several levels - and I do not see any need for this. According to your suggestion robotics-typesetting is rather a copy of science-typesetting. If robotics stays under science the issue is void and science-typesetting can be used. Moreover robotics-common might actually become science-robotics and robotics-collision-detection contains only one single package that might be perfectly integrated into common for the moment. I just turned this into code in the debian-robotics dir of the CDD repository. My advise would be to fill the gaps in the remaining tasks files (all the missing Homepage, License, Pkg-Description fields). Due to quality issues we can not move the robotics task to debian-science dir, because the web pages for robotics would be rendered quite ugly and I would hate half-brewn stuff in this field. Just tell me once you are finished and we move the robotics task to debian-science and drop debian-robotics until more people might join your team. Otherwise, I have a lot of things to do Sure. Don't underestimate the work. Just start with the small piece you can do for the moment and see how it evolves. Kind regards Andreas. [1] http://people.debian.org/~tille/cdd/ -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Alioth project to use is pkg-science
On Tue, 13 May 2008, Raphael Hertzog wrote: So can I remove the pkg-science project and its associated svn repository? I injected wordnet today morning as a testing balloon - and it was successfully moved to debian-science (as well as the other stuff). So removal of pkg-science seems to be possible. Thanks Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Draft on wiki.debian.org for Debian Science
On Thu, 15 May 2008, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: It is a draft, probably full of mistakes, imprecisions and fuzzy. Don't hesitate to update it. http://wiki.debian.org/DebianScience/ContributingToDebianScience Just added Link to Debian Science CDD meta packages and a hint how actually work on the list of interesting packages (editing tasks files). Finally a link to Debian Med Biology packages was added. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Wiki or tasks?
On Fri, 16 May 2008, Frederic Lehobey wrote: :-) Can we put cronjobs in Alioth accounts? Well, David Paleino did so to update the Debian Med tasks. So I guess if you have a login on Alioth you can do so. You should make sure that you set your umask properly to allow any group member to override the files that are created by the cronjob owner. The script that creates the page tries some workarounds regarding permissions - but I just want to mention to make sure you will be nice to fellow team members. ;-) Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debian-science repository structure
yn Sun, 18 May 2008, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: Since we do not know if we will move to one repository or keep both running forever, I'd prefer to have the same repository layout in both VCSs. Yep, I agree with you. It is a work in progress. I would even go one step further: We should move the current SVN to a well structured git. (I never used git before but I guess my lazyness would let me stick to SVN for ever if I would have no strong reason to start with git - so just force me to learn it. ;-)) while working at a package at the moment I was not able to decide where to put it: physics or chemisty? It would fit into both tasks perfectly. I think it doesn't really matter if we have problems to categorize a package from time to time. Well, there are definitely cases where a package perfectly fits into two categories. This is no problem for the meta packages (just list the package in both) but in the VCS it is. I admit I have no really good idea whether this can be resolved in the category based VCS layout. If there is such a thing like symlinks in GIT that you put a package under one category and then symlink from the other it might be possible - but I don't know whether it is really good. http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/cdd/projects/science/trunk/debian-science/tasks/?rev=0sc=0 [2] I already started to work on that but it's not uploaded yet. I'll announce it as soon as it's something readable. Can I participate on this ? Sure. You just became a member of cdd alioth team. Feel free to edit the tasks files or whatever you might like to change. Just ask if anything remains unclear. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debian-science repository structure
On Sun, 18 May 2008, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: Those are of course valid points, though I still think that is something that can be generated from the meta-information that is already available. Writing a script for that should be fairly trivial and I'd be happy to do so! Does anyone else has an opinion on this ? Andreas ? Charles ? I admit I do not really understand the question. What meta-information are you actually talking about. I've thought we would talk about categorisation of a package and I don't think that it is in any of the meta information of a package (except perhaps in the Vcs-* fields *if* we just decided for a category and thus the problem is recursive). IMHO if we face a package that might belong to more than one category I would leave the maintainer of the package the decision. This is similar to the situation if we have package that might belong to Chemestry and Biology: If the package is just maintained by DebiChem we (as the Debian Med team) just leave it there (and are happy that a group of reliable maintainers cares about it). My request for categorisation was based upon the idea that we might release other CDDs out of the umbrella Debian Science and putting packages into categories might easily give the answer what is for them. But I admit the concept has some drawbacks. Personnaly, I don't care about the format. I care about the content (just like SVN/git). ;) Well said. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debian-science repository structure
On Sun, 18 May 2008, David Bremner wrote: At the moment I am preoccupied with deciding how to best transition my quilt based packages to git. Of course keeping using quilt is an option. Uhm, I hope so. I really hope that using quilt _and_ git is no contradiction. I think that tasks sound like a reasonable primary format for the metadata. One can generate static web pages (I guess debian-med already has tools to do this). Yes and it is currently perfectly possible for Debian Science without touching debian-science VCS because it is completely based on the meta packages source. I think it should be possible to generate mr configurations, or git superprojects automagically from the tasks files as well. I guess we need to include appropriate VCS-git and VCS-browser fields in the tasks files. For what use? I would be curious to know what a use case for check out all of the physics packages would be. Well, probably this is some kind of crook because most probably there is no real physicist who needs all packages related to physics on his workstation. The same is true for the other sciences. You would need more fine grained packages for special tasks in physics (and others). If you want to realise this you have to start a Debian Phyiscs CDD - but nobody volunteered to do this so far as I know. So I think no real harm is done if we provide at least an option for phyiscists to quickly install all the software that might be interesting for them (and ignore what is not interesting) or have the nice effect to list everything what we have for physicists at http://cdd.alioth.debian.org/science/tasks/physics.php as long there is no Debian Physics realised. It is about users who need some help. Users who really know what they want are free to ignore this service. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian-science: synthesis about VCS repository structure
On Mon, 19 May 2008, Steve M. Robbins wrote: Wait a minute. What's wrong with using svn for those who want to? I have some packages that I'd like to put into debian-science at some point, but I'm not about to learn the favourite vcs of the week to do so. favourite vcs of the week - ROFL ;-) I definitely share your point about the pet VCSes that are growing all over Free Software world one performing better as the other. On the other hand according to my observation git gains some position inside Debian to become something like _the_ VCS and thus I think we should try to settle on a reasonable default. This could be supported by a well written policy that contains step by step examples which might be a good help for newcommers. If this is done I see using git more as a chance to learn something new and valuable for my day to day work than a nuisance to follow the habits of some geeks. So I havily relay on a really good documentation what to do. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debian-science repository structure
On Mon, 19 May 2008, Manuel Prinz wrote: Sorry for being unclear! As stated in my other email, I was talking about the task files. Those are (in my understanding) meta-information about which packages belong the task or category and therefore which tasks or categories a package belongs. For example: tasks/physics mentions foo and bar, tasks/chemistry mentions bar and baz, then bar is in the physics and chemistry task. Ahh OK, so you mean the just existing tasks files at http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/cdd/projects/science/trunk/debian-science/tasks/?rev=0sc=0 right? There is no need to put a directory structure to the repo for that. As I admited earlier this approach has some drawbacks - so I relay on what seems to be a consensus on this list that we do not really need this structure. That's also the point I was trying to make: I do not object tasks, I just object a task-based directory hierarchy. If one wants to download all physics packages, this is trivial: Parse that tasks/physics file for the package names and pass each package name to debcheckout. Done. Ahh, that's perhaps a good idea for a tool that might go into the cdd-common package. In case somebody volunteers to write such a script I would add this soon - if not it will be placed somewhere in the middle of my cdd package todo list. Writing a tool for that is a piece of cake and this is aproach is IMHO superior than to checkout a part of the VCS tree that might not contain a package because someone put it into a different category. This is probably right. Sorry for causing confusion on that! No problem and thanks for the clarification Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian-science: synthesis about VCS repository structure
On Mon, 19 May 2008, Manuel Prinz wrote: I have to say that I do not see a reason why to enforce things here. Of course it's not the optimal solution but I would be perfectly fine to have both system in parallel so people have time to learn a new VCS. If you have to much time to learn it might be longer than your life time (even if you become =100 years old). I know from own experience that I would try to safe my time and use the old tool I know as long as it is possible. The best chance to start with a new tool is a new project. Once you insert data with the old toll and try the I could move this stuff later anyway you will not do so because in most cases moving data from an existing system to another one is much harder than start from scratch. I think we should recommend using Git, not enforcing it, unless there are some serious problems (maintainance burden, technical problems, whatever). (I've not heared from anyone wanting back to SVN once familiar with Git.) I've heard from noone wanting back to Word once familiar with LaTeX. If more people would have started with LaTeX the number of copies of Word would be much smaller ... This is what I was talking about in my previous emails: I do not see it as a directory for work in progress packages but as a directory containing task descriptions, as the Science CDD does! This is the meta-information I was talking about: The task/category is extracted from those files, so one can add a package to the physics and chemistry files. In that way, a package fits into two categories, without having it to depend on any directory structure. I think we can use tools already existing for the Science CDD / Debian-Med. (If they allow us to use those. ;) ) It is the declared *intention* that these tools are widely used and I would like to encourage everybody to do so. Currently the tasks files are stored in the CDD repository under projects and I think this is a reasonable place to store them. Everybody who is interested to enhance this stuff is very welcome - just ask me to be added to the alioth team. I would like to suggest the debian-custom mailing list which is intended to discuss common CDD issues. From those files/descriptions, meta-packages can be build, or they can even be used for a CDD. (Not familiar with CDDs yet, so just speculating.) In short: The tasks directory is the place where task/categorization information goes. As I said: It exist in another place which turned out to be a not so bad place. If there are good reasons to move this stuff to the debian-science repository this is fine for me as well. The idea to store them in a common VCS with debian-med etc was to keep them together to let the tools work on a common place - but this is not really necessary. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debian-science repository structure
On Mon, 19 May 2008, Manuel Prinz wrote: Maybe I'll find some time on the weekend or next week to write it. If someone else steps up, I'm fine with that too. As you say, I do not think it's urgent. You would most probably like to use http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/debian-med/trunk/community/infrastructure/scripts/cddtasktools.py?op=filerev=0sc=0 to find out the list of existing packages. Unfortunately this is currently in the debian-med scope but ist should move to common CDD framework *soon*. If I only had some time to factorize it a little bit more and move it where it should be ... And it looks like I have to get a little more familiar with CDDs. ;) I would live to see this. ;-) We need some more people! Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian-science: synthesis about VCS repository structure
On Mon, 19 May 2008, Steve M. Robbins wrote: I was merely reacting to Sylvestre's proposal that git be the ONLY vcs allowed. My question stands: is there any real disadvantage to allowing the user's choice of vcs? I think there is. In the Debian Med team people sometimes do some changes via script in the whole repository if there are some systematical changes. For instance I remember that we first had DM-Upload-Allowed: Yes in many control files. It turned out that this was case sensitive and so it was changed to DM-Upload-Allowed: yes automatically in the whole repository. This example might be weak because you could argue that you could easily run your skript on two repositories but experience shows that you tend to forget the other thing which is not so interesting for whatever reason. Also the Debian-Med developers page [1] shows the current activity in our SVN. If you have two repositories you have to care for a mix of two repositories and there might be other tools invented that gain an additional degree of complexity when having more than one repository. The main disadvantage I can think of is that it is a nuisance for those who want to do project-wide work; for example, David Paleino once set up a watch file for insighttoolkit. My response to that objection is that (at least in my experience with debian-med) the fraction of project-wide work is trivial and if I choose the minority vcs, I'll live with not having the attention. This is also a disadvantage. The main ADvantage of allowing several vcs is inclusivity. You well know that some refuse to use debian-med because it allows only SVN. I hope debian-science won't repeat that mistake. I agree that it is somewhat boring but I doubt that it is a problem of the used VCS but rather a different kind of thinking which is connected to the current discussion on debian-devel, how to store patches. So I rather think the reason for not using the Debian-Med VCS is the policy to have all patches in debian/patches than the used VCS technique. Yes, I do appreciate beginner docs; I relied on them for learning svn and quilt. I'm not adverse to learning git; but I will do it on my terms, not in order to join debian-science. Sure - you are always free to choose. That's the freedom we have as volunteers. If Debian Sciece is not attractive enough for you than you maintain your packages as you did before. The only chance to draw you in is making Debian Science attractive enough that the advantage for you (and others) is big enough. I hope many people will work on this. ;-) Kind regards (and thanks for your input) Andreas. [1] http://debian-med.alioth.debian.org/ -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cbflib_0.7.9.1-1_i386.changes ACCEPTED
On Fri, 23 May 2008, Teemu Ikonen wrote: I'll try to add the final polish to rasmol this weekend and move the existing git repo from collab-maint to debian-science, since I'm more active in that group. Group maintenance of rasmol would be nice, but is it ok to change the maintainer field to debian-science@lists.debian.org ? Well, I think the alioth list of debian-science is more apropriate than the kind of debian-science user oriented list. So I would suggest: Maintainer: Debian Science Team [EMAIL PROTECTED] DM-Upload-Allowed: yes Uploaders: Teemu Ikonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... and apply for Debian Maintainership ... Are there people in the debian-science alioth group (other than me) interested in working with this package? Well, probably chances are not as good in the first place and you might be the only one showing up as Uploader (plus your sponsor). The idea is that it makes it much easier for others to drop in if it is clearly visible that the main maintainer is open for cooperation. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hijacking TeXMaker by Debian Science Team
Hi, there are several open bugs in the TeXMaker package that are not RC enough to justify a NMU but the fact that they are not even answered by the maintainer to acknowledge that he has registered the problems makes me wonder whether the maintainer is MIA. So I started some action [1] and fixed 4 out of 6 bugs while most probably the remaining bugs are upstream issues. I would also volunteer to care for these remaining ones - perhaps they are even fixed in the new upstream version. I also fixed all except one lintian issues and added a doc-base file. Moreover I did a general polishing of packaging. I hope that Joseph (the maintainer) agrees to the team maintenance and that we could go for an upload soon. I wonder what would be the right thing to do if we get no answer from him after about one week. My main motivation was to get a recent TeXMaker version into Debian. I don't use it myself but would be willing to take some care inside a maintaining team because I have some friends who might regard this a helpful tool to start with LaTeX. Kind regards Andreas. [1] svn://svn.debian.org/svn/debian-science/typesetting/texmaker/trunk/ -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian Science Policy: First draft online and open for discussion
On Wed, 28 May 2008, Manuel Prinz wrote: I'll add a paragraph about that. We can also change it to Debhelper. That's what is discussion is for: To find a consensus about that. At the moment, it is just a suggestion. I think: Suggesting / recommending tu use CDBS where it makes sense if fine - we can't force anybody to use a certain tool anyway. The where it makes sense term means that CDBS is fine for simple packages but if it comes to tricky things plain debhelper sounds less time consuming. We had good experiences with CDBS in Debian Med - but we will not enforce its use. I'm missing something explicit about general comitt rights/etiquette. Good point, I really did not think about that all the way through. I personally would be OK if someone from the team would make non-intrusive changes, meaning something that one would i.e. change in an NMU. It is very reasonable to raise this issue but my experience in practice shows that there is practically no missuse. So mentioning the problem in the policy seems to be correct - but I think it has low practical relevance. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Hijacking TeXMaker by Debian Science Team
On Wed, 28 May 2008, Daniel Leidert wrote: there are several open bugs in the TeXMaker package that are not RC enough to justify a NMU Did I miss something? Why need bugs to have an RC status to get fixed by NMU? As long as you follow the best practices, you can fix all bugs by NMU. OK, NMU rules are relaxed, but I would prefer to stick to RC bugs. But in this case I do not only talk about NMU but about hijacking / tacking over the package completely by Debian Science. What do you think about this? Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian Science Policy: First draft online and open for discussion
On Wed, 28 May 2008, Manuel Prinz wrote: a first draft of the Debian Science Policy is now available in the Debian Science repository and can be checked out with: git clone git://git.debian.org/git/debian-science/policy.git Now I was able to read the proposal: A list of packages has been created by the Debian-Med project. Their website contains a long list of software packages in Debian and yet to be packaged. Wrong. ;-) Well, I know that the web page contains the string Debian-Med but this is rather a bug than a feature. I'm just not finished with the rewrite of the scripts and the goal is for sure to mention the correct CDD. Even if I have done a lot of the work (besides David Paleino who deserves the honor of making it happen at all) I was jus wearing my general CDD hut. BTW, the procedure, how to (re)create this index is described at http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/Extremadura2008/WebSentinelHowto And it is also not *their* website it is the CDD web site which might either be moved to debian-science.what.ever or stay there under http://cdd.alioth.debian.org/science which I'd regard not really wrong. debian/copyright The machine-readable format must be used. I guess we had this item in the thread before. I just want to mention one additional aspect: If we write must at any place, we should be aware that must implicites some means we have to enforce this requirement. Do we really have such means. For instance would we remove the repository of a package if it hits the archive? Is it a bug of the package if it has no machine readable copyright (we only have a means to enforce if the bug has RC severity)? Does somebody volunteer to rewrite copyright files and check them in? So yes, I would _really_, _really_ want to have this realised but feel free to blame me for checking in packages that do not yet fullfill this requirement. Yes, I will port the copyright sooner or later and I regard this of some importance - but other bugs are more important and there is not even a lintian warning about non-machine readable copyright files (at least I did not realised). So in short: If we write must we should be clear about the consequences if a package fails this requirement. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cronjob for science tasks
On Tue, 10 Jun 2008, Manuel Prinz wrote: I'd volunteer for that since I already did some of the work and have patches ready. I wonder what is the best way to handle it: File bugs or apply the patches to the VCS? Most of the packages do not have Vcs-* fields set, so I could fix that while at it. I also prepared watch fiels for some of the packages that lacked some but did not look into all of them. I think a reasonable way to start is to ask the maintainer of the package whether he is interested in group maintenance or not. Advise to use the Debian Science Vcs (in case the package in question is not just in Vcs) even if group maintenance is not prefered - this keeps things in our radar. This contact (accompanied by patches) might be more friendly and convincing than an anonymous bug report. If the mail remains unanswered I would use the BTS and depending from the general status of the package (I learned that several of these candidates are way outdated and not maintained) just push it to group maintenance in our BTS. For instance I did so with texmaker. I learned that the e-mail address which was stated in the control file information bounced - so what else than taking over the package would be reasonable? I guess we will find more such packages. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
