[Debian-med-packaging] Bug#854837: Package dicompyler does not work

[Vojtech Kulvait]

Well Andreas,
basically I ment upstream Debian development not really taking over the
development of dicompyler itself.

I think there are issues with the current Debian package but it can be
useful for particular users to have it in Debian.  I think I can fix in a
month or so the problems regarding widgets and make it reasonable stable to
the next stable Debian release.

So please lower the severity to important and I am OK with a git, I will
set up some development branch and when it will be ready merge it to the
master.

Kind regards,
Vojtech.

2017-03-10 10:55 GMT+01:00 Andreas Tille <andreas at fam-tille.de>:

> Hi Vojtech,
>
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 10:23:35AM +0100, Vojtech Kulvait wrote:
> > If I were about to take care about this package in upstream what should I
> > do and what is the development timetable?
>
> I'm not really sure what you need to take over upstream - probably the
> owner of the project needs to grant you commit permissions to the
> repository.
>
> Regarding the Debian package it is sufficient to develop a (quilt-)patch
> that lets the program work.  If you prefer SVN over Git I can move the
> packaging to Git but you can also simply sent a patch here to this bug.
> The development time table is quite clear and the status page
>
>    https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/dicompyler
>
> says:
>
>    Marked for autoremoval on 11 March: 854837
>
>    Version of dicompyler is marked for autoremoval from testing on Sat
>    11 Mar 2017. It is affected by 854837. You should try to prevent the
>    removal by fixing these RC bugs.
>
> So well, this is tomorrow which is a bit dense to meet the next stable
> release.  Removal from testing means the package will not be shipped
> with the next official Debian stable release.  However, in case the
> package gets fixed I'd happily provide it via backports.debian.org and
> if the development continues in the next stable Debian release (usually
> about two years are inbetween two stable releases).
>
> BTW, there is one way to deliver the current dicompyler in next Debian
> Stable if you say:  Well, it is buggy but has some practical use anyway.
> In this case we could lower the severity of the bug to "important" which
> is not release critical.  Since I'm no user of the package I can not
> really decide what severity is correct in this case.
>
> Hope this explanation is helpful
>
>      Andreas.
>
> --
> http://fam-tille.de
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-med-packaging/attachments/20170310/99b29f95/attachment-0001.html>