Hi all, I've uploaded my last packaging effort based on the official release of getfem version 4.0.0 here:
http://mentors.debian.net/cgi-bin/sponsor-pkglist?action=details;package=getfem Some remarks: 1. In accordance with the tar.gz-name and the SO-NAME of the last upstream release I've removed the "++" suffix from the name of the source-package as well as from the names of all binary packages. 2. I let the superlu code included in the upstream package intact. I 've included all its copyright relevant information in debian/copyright, but during the build process I've used the libsuperlu3-dev package instead. 3. In this email I CC'ed "Ana Beatriz Guerrero Lopez" who is the maintainer of gmm++-dev in order to attract her attention to my previous question: > 3. gmm stand alone packages > Since there is a debian package for standalone gmm too: > http://packages.debian.org/sid/all/libgmm++-dev > and since the upstream for gmm++ and getfem++ is the same, > I suppose the standalone gmm++ package could be replaced by the > one contained in getfem++. > At this point a decision should taken also for the name of the > package (libgmm vs libgmm++, see point 1). 4. I would like to suggest that getfem is moved to the "Debian Scientific Computing Team", since this team already maintains many similar packages. As I haven't contacted neither the people who worked on getfem in the past nor the "Debian Scientific Computing Team" yet, I CC persons from both parties in this mail hoping to get some positive response from both. In any case, I would be glad to continue working on this package under the mentoring/sponsoring of anyone who would like to undertake it. Regards Kostas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
