Hi, First, I would like to apologize for the delay of my answer. I have a lot of work in parallel, and my situation won't change before june or july.
However, I can confirm that the FW4SPL team doesn't want to leave the Debian Med project. I think that the packaging of fw4spl 0.9.2 won't be maintained, and that the team will work on the packaging of an other version. This version depends on VTK6 and ITK4. I transmit your messages to the team, and I keep you updated. Best regards, Corentin 2016-04-10 22:34 GMT+02:00 Sebastiaan Couwenberg <sebas...@xs4all.nl>: > On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 19:13:21 +0100 Andreas Tille wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 07:14:09PM +0000, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 08:55:42PM +0200, Esa Peuha wrote: > > > > Package: ftp.debian.org > > > > > > > > fw4spl has had only three upload to Debian: the first two a few > > > > days apart in March 2015, the third in July. > > > > > > the fact that a package had the last maintainer upload so "recently" > > > tell me that it should be good to wait. though here the maintainer > > > seems to have disappeared, indeed. > > > > > > Please try to at least CC the maintainer when you file a RoQA for the > > > removal of the full source package, adding $p...@pacakges.debian.org to > > > X-Debbugs-CC is more than enough. > > > > I would like to stress the fact that the Debian Med team would like to > > keep this package inside Debian. The package and its dependencies are > > complex. The intention is to switch to insighttoolkit4 so it will not > > really block the removal of insighttoolkit (version 3). > > > > Thanks for your patience > > > > Andreas. > > > > PS: Corentin, it would be good if you would be able to give some rough > > estimation of the time needed. > > Please reconsider your desire to keep this package inside Debian. > Keeping the package in unstable in its currently shape is hindering > various other packages in its dependency chain. See #820632 for example. > > This package is keeping libvtk5.8 in unstable, and that keeps the old > netcdf packages around which hinder testing migration of every new > package revision since two transitions ago (back in October 2015). > > fw4spl is likewise keeping the gdcm (2.4.4-4) packages in unstable, > which have long since been superseded by the 2.6 series. These also keep > libvtk5.8 in unstable. > > This package should be removed from the Debian archive until a new > release supporting the current versions of the dependencies can > reintroduce the package in Debian. > > It's sad to see that the other reverse dependencies that are keeping > libvtk5.8 in Debian unstable are all maintained by the Debian Med Team. > The VTK situation in Debian has been highly annoying for far too long > already, we should not have to endure that any longer. We should get rid > of all the badly maintained packages that are prolonging the pain. > > Kind Regards, > > Bas > > -- > GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1 > Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146 50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1 >
