Re: New CamiTK 6.0.0 release

Étienne Mollier <[email protected]> Wed, 21 Jan 2026 23:09:20 +0100

Newsgroups	gmane.linux.debian.devel.medical
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

Hi Manik,

Manik Bhattacharjee, on 2026-01-21:
> with Emmanuel we checked the package that was accepted in experimental and
> everything works correctly.
> 
> During the test we detected a small UI issue and I added a patch to fix it.
> I pushed to salsa with a new changelog to ask for inclusion into unstable, I
> hope this is the right way to do it.
> 
> As no package depends on CamiTK, there is no risk that our packages would
> break another one.

Thanks for your work on camitk, experimental pseudo-excuses[1]
raised no problems during quality assessment.  I am running a
build of your work and believe it will be suitable for upload,
unless we missed something.

[1]: https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?experimental=1&package=camitk

> The way we tested the experimental package is the following:
> 
> [trimmed implementation details]
> 
> This was necessary because otherwise, installing camitk-imp from
> experimental (6.0.0) would pull libqtpropertybrowser-dev (5.2.0) from
> unstable instead of 6.0.0 from experimental.
>
> Once we installed camitk-imp we were able to run and test it.

Acknowledged, I believe another option that would work too,
would be to use aptitude's dependency resolver.  I found myself
to use it regularly when dealing with dependencies pulled from
experimental, while the default apt-get wouldn't pull the
experimental version without a lot of hinting.

Have a nice day,  :)
-- 
  .''`.  Étienne Mollier <[email protected]>
 : :' :  pgp: 8f91 b227 c7d6 f2b1 948c  8236 793c f67e 8f0d 11da
 `. `'   sent from /dev/pts/1, please excuse my verbosity
   `-    on air: Genesis - Ripples

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 833 B)