Re: dicomscope packaging
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 8:57 PM, Juergen Salk <jsa@debian.org> wrote:
> * Mathieu Malaterre <mathieu.malaterre@gmail.com> [081216 11:38]:
>
>> For my next task, I'd like to take on dicomscope packaging. Because
>> of the way it is build, the src code need to be moved within dcmtk. So
>> my question is:
>>
>> Is it ok for a package to download two tarballs. reshuffle the second
>> one in the first one, and present just a single tarball as a new
>> enhanced 'dcmtk' package ?
>
> No. DICOMscope should depend on the dcmtk package version that is
> already available in Debian rather than throwing in an ancient
> dcmtk version in addition to the one that is already there.
At what point in my message did I say I would be using an old version of dcmtk ?
All I am saying is that for building dicomscope, I would like a new
(meta)package src package which would contains both dcmtk (3.5.4 +
debian patch) and dicomscope (with any required patchs).
> I know that - in its current state - DICOMscope 3.5.1 will
> presumably compile out-of-the-box with dcmtk version 3.5.0 only.
> But it would certainly be possible (and very creditable)
> to adapt the DICOMscope 3.5.1 JNI classes to the current dcmtk API ...
That's my goal.
> On the other hand: DICOMscope 3.5.1 is an ancient version by
> itself (last update in 2001 or so). I doubt that upstream would
> adapt your changes to DICOMscope 3.5.1 as they already provide
> DICOMscope 3.6.0 as a binary package.
Clear enough.
> Would be interesting to
> know if they are going to make its sources available as well
> somewhen ...
I received the confirmation that this is not going to happen any time soon.
--
Mathieu
Reply to: