On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 01:52:19PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 14/07/15 13:37, Ricardo Mones wrote: > > Hi Emilio, > > > > On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 05:41:23PM +0200, [email protected] wrote: > >> Source: claws-mail > >> Severity: important > >> Tags: sid stretch > >> User: [email protected] > >> Usertags: oldlibs libwebkitgtk-1.0-0 webkit1 > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> claws-mail depends on libwebkitgtk-1.0-0, which is deprecated in > >> favor of libwebkit2gtk-4.0-37. claws-mail should be ported to the new > >> webkitgtk version so we can remove the old, unmaintained one. > >> > >> As an intermediate step you can port claws-mail to > >> libwebkitgtk-3.0-0, which has a similar API to libwebkitgtk-1.0-0 but > >> is based on GTK+ 3.0. Thus you'd be porting claws-mail to GTK+ 3.0 > >> first, using libwebkitgtk-3.0-0, and you could then port to > >> libwebkit2gtk-4.0-37 later. But note that libwebkitgtk-3.0-0 is also > >> deprecated. > >> > >> Please try to do this before the Stretch release as we're going to > >> try to remove libwebkitgtk-1.0-0 this cycle. > > > > Given the age of upstream GTK+ 3.0 porting bug¹ and the effort required > > to do such porting I doubt very much this will happen soon, unless some > > porting guru comes out of the blue. > > > > ¹ http://www.thewildbeast.co.uk/claws-mail/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2371 > > > >> We'll bump this to serious when the list of rdeps is small and we're > >> getting ready to removing libwebkitgtk-1.0-0 completely. > >> > >> If you have any question don't hesitate to ask. > > > > Well, there's some other solutions just from the top of my head, from > > easier to harder: > > > > * drop fancy plugin, which is the one introducing such dependency (and > > leave Claws Mail users without HTML mail rendering) > > * upstream embeds the library within the plugin (since it's going to > > be removed it's not even an ECC) > > * fork the library keeping API/ABI, repackage it for Debian and depend > > on the forked one > > > > Since upstream is probably not happy with first one, I guess one of the > > other two will be selected, or something better, if available. > > The second and third options sound like totally bad ideas to me. > Please don't do those. For now just keep the status quo and poke > upstream about the switch to GTK+ 3.
Agreed, they're bad ideas, but switching to GTK+3 is not going to happen just by poking upstream. The team is just too small and there's no real motivation or need to do it. Those solutions were meant for the moment when libwebkitgtk-1.0-0 is removed, not for now, don't worry :) > > Do you have planned dates for the removal to happen? > > Might not happen for Stretch given the amount of rdeps at the moment. If we > can't do it for Stretch, we'll definitely try to get rid of it for Buster. But > no specific dates atm. Well, then there's still time for things to develop. Thanks for the information. regards, -- Ricardo Mones ~ bash: ./signature: No such file or directory /bin/bash
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
