[needs-packaging] Updating OpenCV to 2.0

Bug #490525 reported by kecsap
16
This bug affects 3 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
opencv (Ubuntu)
Invalid
Wishlist
Unassigned

Bug Description

The OpenCV 2.0 was released on 1th of October. The current version (1.0) is more than 2 years old. You can download it from:

http://sourceforge.net/projects/opencvlibrary/files/

Please do it at least in Karmic+Jaunty.

kecsap (csaba-kertesz)
tags: added: needs-packaging
Revision history for this message
Brian Murray (brian-murray) wrote :

*** This is an automated message ***

This bug is tagged needs-packaging which identifies it as a request for a new package in Ubuntu. As a part of the managing needs-packaging bug reports specification, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/Specs/NeedsPackagingBugs, all needs-packaging bug reports have Wishlist importance. Subsequently, I'm setting this bug's status to Wishlist.

summary: - Updating OpenCV to 2.0
+ [needs-packaging] Updating OpenCV to 2.0
Changed in opencv (Ubuntu):
importance: Undecided → Wishlist
Revision history for this message
Chihiro Kuroki (9nzj7bot) wrote :

Debian sid have already had the new packages of opencv.
http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/o/opencv/opencv_2.0.0-1/changelog

Revision history for this message
kecsap (csaba-kertesz) wrote :

Hmm, it is in unstable only. Will it be in Lucid automatically? AFAIK lucid grabs the packages only from testing.

(I checked the Ubuntu release policy and I see that it is only possible to get OpenCV 2.0 to Lucid, so forget about Karmic/Jaunty in this bug report.)

Revision history for this message
Chihiro Kuroki (9nzj7bot) wrote :

After a version of a software package has remained in unstable for a certain length of time without no serious bugs, that package is automatically migrated to the testing distribution of Debian. So I think they will be in Lucid for a while. It may be difficult to put them into universe packages of Karmic+Jaunty.

Revision history for this message
kecsap (csaba-kertesz) wrote :

Should we close the bug as won't fix or invalid and let's see if the new version does not come to Lucid and open a new bug?

Revision history for this message
Chihiro Kuroki (9nzj7bot) wrote :

I made a mistake.
>without no serious bugs
without serious bugs

>Should we close the bug as won't fix or invalid <snip>
I agree with you.

Revision history for this message
kecsap (csaba-kertesz) wrote :

According to the last comments, set to invalid state, it can be closed.

Changed in opencv (Ubuntu):
status: New → Invalid
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.