Re: Plans for Squeeze release and Alioth accounts.
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 02:31:55PM +0200, Steffen Moeller wrote:
> >
> > 1. Turning the debian-live based live CD Sebastian Hilbert has prepared
> > to provide GNUmed into a general Debian Med live CD and maintain the
> > input files in our SVN.
> >
> > I have not yet dived into debian-live nor am I a big fan of live CDs
> > in general. But I learned that people are asking for it frequently
> > and IMHO it comes quite cheap with less effort considering Sebastians
> > work. It would be great if somebody would volunteer to spend some time
> > into this.
>
> How much gain would you see from having a debian-med-bioinformatics live CD separated from
> the remainder? Would there be a point? Now that the USB sticks become so cheap, I'd say
> no. But when we pay for storage and upload to, say, Amazon's EC2, then we might want to
> reconsider.
Good point. Please read my "live CD" as "live bootable image". Having
a bootable USB stick containing Debian Med stuff is even more fun. I'm
using my personal USB stick which I created using Privatix[1] which is
in principle created using debian-live but some aspects had to be
adapted for USB sticks [2] (unfortunately only in German). I have not
yet verified whether newer versions of debian-live can flawlessly create
images for bootable USB sticks as well.
> My personal release goal would be less on a live CD but on an Debiam Med Amazon EC2 AMI
> and a routine for its update. Those updates should in my view be performed within Amazon's
> via its bundling functionality, not from the outside via David's overhauled VMbuilder, in
> order to save traffic costs.
I admit I have not yet dealt with this Amazon EC2 AMI stuff and thus I
can not comment on this. Sounds probably like an interesting goal and
I actually see no conflict in the bootable image above or do I miss
something?
> > 2. med-doc: The status of this package is really terrible and I confirm
>
> I was not even much aware of it :) I would be tempted to remove it from any release goal.
You mean removing the med-doc package or remove this item from the
release goals?
> > 3. GT.M packages. When I woke up this morning these three goals came into
> > my mind while I considered this third goal as rather a "release dream"
> > than a release goal because on one hand we really need it to be able
> > to come up with VISTA packages at some point in time but we are just
> > lacking time and competence here. Guess how happy I was when I later
> > found an e-mail of one of the GT.M coders (K.S. Bhaskar) with subject
> > "Questions for Debian packages for GT.M". I hope that I was able to
> > convince him to coordinate here on the list and in SVN to get really
> > official Debian packages to move on in the Hospital Information Systems
> > front.
>
> What you are describing is a closer tie to the upstream developers. This is very much in
> my favour as well, as you know. We have a few on board or at least clost to board already
> (AutoDock, BALL, GNUmed, ..?) and we should listen to them. What I would like to add are
Well, closer tie to upstream developers is actually no release goal - we
do it independantly from any release. I actually mean what I said:
Getting GT.M into Debian would be a release goal of Debian Med (but
before I recieved K.S. Bhaskar's mail I would have hesitated to state it
as such. It would be a very interesting application for Debian Med and
would be the basis for a really professional hospital information
system. Without this we can not really claim to provide the most
important free medical applications in Debian. So I actually mean
what I wrote: Get GT.M into Debian.
> 4. Official ties with user organisations.
> The ISCB (Intelligent Systems in Computation Biology) and BOSC (Bioinforamtics Open
> Source Conference) come to mind. They won't work directly on the packaging probably, but
> they would strengthen our ties with upstream, help in spreading the news and we'd have
> another unified channel back to our users that are not our users, yet. So, a release goal
> for me would be pointers from those community sites to a liveCD or AMI of ours with a
> statement that they are supporting our efforts.
I support this - but that's actually not really in out hands whether
other people set pointers to us. So I do not know whether this can
actually be one of *our* release goals.
> 5. Extended meta-information for packages, i.e. the pointers to registration sites
Yes, this would be great.
Kind regards
Andreas.
[1] http://mandalka.name/privatix/index.html.en
[2] http://mandalka.name/privatix/source/ (only German :-()
--
http://fam-tille.de
Klarmachen zum Ändern!
Reply to: