RFS: postgis-2.0.3-3

2013-07-22 Thread Markus Wanner
Hi, unfortunately, the postgis package uploaded recently run into a FTBFS. I didn't take arch-only builds into account. That, among a couple of other things got fixed in the mean time. Most notably, the test suite now runs through just fine. The current postgis-2.0.3-3 works fine on sid, wheezy

Re: RFS: postgis-2.0.3

2013-06-26 Thread Francesco P. Lovergine
Markus and possibly others please provide the correct required tags to upstream/debian branches at every new release. I just had to add a couple of them onto the postgis repo. About libgdal-dev versus libgdal1-dev, the proper dependency is libgdal-dev, the old libgdal1-dev should be considered

Re: RFS: postgis-2.0.3

2013-06-26 Thread Markus Wanner
Francesco, On 06/26/2013 11:11 AM, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote: please provide the correct required tags to upstream/debian branches at every new release. Thanks, good point. I simply didn't think about that. In a similar vein: is it okay to create beta branches? Maybe 'upstream-beta' and

Re: RFS: postgis-2.0.3

2013-06-26 Thread Francesco P. Lovergine
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 11:18:25AM +0200, Markus Wanner wrote: Francesco, On 06/26/2013 11:11 AM, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote: please provide the correct required tags to upstream/debian branches at every new release. Thanks, good point. I simply didn't think about that. In a

RFS: postgis-2.0.3

2013-06-07 Thread Markus Wanner
Hi, recently, I've been working on packaging PostGIS 2.0 for Debian and now consider it ready for uploading to unstable. I'm a DM and would also appreciate upload rights for that package. Some notes: I took great care to ensure postgis-2.0.3 won't break existing installations of postgis-1.x. For