RFS: postgis-2.0.3
Markus Wanner
markus at bluegap.ch
Wed Jun 26 09:18:25 UTC 2013
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 'beta' to start packaging on postgis-2.1 (or any
other beta release in the future)?
> About libgdal-dev versus libgdal1-dev, the proper dependency is libgdal-dev,
> the old libgdal1-dev should be considered only for back-compatibility.
> In this specific case I would use something like
>
> libgdal-dev | libgdal1-dev
>
> until the old releases still will be considered for backports.
The reasoning behind that was that postgis-2.0 will hardly ever be
compatible to a libgdal2-dev.
> Ratio: we will neve provide multiple versions of gdal development packages,
> so using a versioned name is pointless and inconsistent.
I see. Will change to the proposed variant above.
Regards
Markus
More information about the Pkg-grass-devel
mailing list