Hi Damien On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 15:48 +0200, Damien Raude-Morvan wrote: > So, JenkisCI is using a fork (jenkins-htmlunit-core-js) of the fork > (htmlunit-core-js [1]) > of Rhino package... JenkisCI upstream seems a love code (and > effort...) > duplication.
I don't disagree that this is pretty ugly; Jenkins CI upstream does fork
other projects frequently - here's a short list of the ones I'm being
impacted by during packaging:
dom4j
commons-jexl
json-lib
htmlunit
xstream
commons-jelly
winstone
trilead-ssh2
and ones I intend to avoid:
jcifs
jinterop
Although some of these forks may be due to upstream inactivity I think
this reflects the ~weekly release schedule of the project and the ease
at which they can fork and upstream and maintain it to resolve their
immediate issues.
The introduction of a 3 monthly stable release should help reduce the
impact of the standard release velocity but it does not necessarily
remove the forked dependencies.
I have seen forks disappear and the project revert back to mainstream
upstream (jmdns was an example of this but I just noticed they forked it
again - doh!).
> /with my rhino package maintainer hat/
> Rhino is - now - an active project again (at least, they made a new
> release on 2011-06-03 [2]).
> You should try to convince JenkisCI team to merge back its changes [3]
> (and htmlunit changes [4]) back into Rhino
Absolutely; I'll endeavour to work on making this happen.
I appreciate that this upstream behaviour does increase the effort
required to support packaging of jenkins.
I have the packaging in place so the additional effort is not really on
me in the short term (although I expect to have to deal with updates and
bug fixes) - it will be whomever sponsors these packages for me.
Do you think this will block entry into Debian?
Cheers
James
--
James Page
Software Engineer, Ubuntu Server Team
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
