This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: pre-ITP: New category Gis?
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 07:25:46PM +0200, Reini Urban wrote:
>Christopher Faylor schrieb:
>>On Sat, Oct 09, 2004 at 04:38:35PM +0200, Reini Urban wrote:
>>
>>>If not I'll put proj, geos and gdal into Libs,
>>>postgis into Database, and mapserver into Web.
>>
>>Where does Debian place these packages? Or aren't they available on
>>Debian?
>
>Some are in "Science". Some are not yet in.
Ok. We don't have Science currently. I added it (we've been using
Debian categories as suggestions for cygwin).
>The FreeGIS maintainers should be better able to answer this,
>because they maintain the debian and other packages:
> RedHat 7.2 (i386), Mandrake 8.2 (i386), SuSE 8.0 (i386),
> Debian 'woody' 3.0 (i386)
> http://freegis.org/cd-contents.en.html
>
>Debian itself:
> They are years behind, as with every debian package.
> Categories: http://packages.debian.org/unstable/
>
>proj is at Science
> http://packages.debian.org/unstable/science/proj
>gdal is in Science, but has no debconf template.
>grass is in Science.
>qgis is in Science.
>postgis is ITP'd since a few years. http://bugs.debian.org/146051
> http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/being_packaged.en.html
>geos is ready to be ITP'd. but not yet done.
>
>But I really don't know how they divide between Mathematics and Science.
>For example "mathomatic" as Math package is in science. Other algebra
>packages, such as octave, maxima, gap, axiom, yacas are in Mathematics.
>Also the statistic packages.
> octave is imho much more science than math. well.
>gmsh or admesh as mesh generators are in Mathematics and not in Science.
If we can get a definitive word on what the upstream package maintainers
want, then we should use that, assuming it fits into cygwin's schemes.
Otherwise, I guess we should use whatever makes sense given the categories
available at <http://cygwin.com/setup.html>.
cgf