tony mancill <tmanc...@debian.org> writes: > Hi Felix,
hello Tony, > Yes, I agree that this is a good example of a transition that could have > been handled better. It was my mistake not to verify all of the rdeps > before transitioning jgoodies-forms from experimental to unstable. (I > was in too much of a hurry to get jabref updated.) No Problem. > I'm not sure I understand the references to version 1.4, which was never > part of Debian according to either the package changelog or the PTS > (http://packages.qa.debian.org/libj/libjgoodies-forms-java.html). Prior > to 1.6 there was only 1.3 available in Debian. My problem was that I have a collegue in the Freeplane project who packages for Mageia Linux, which is still at 1.4 (so it's difficult to patch upstream because that would break his package)... :-( > (And 1.7.1 has been > available upstream for over 6 months - that'll be an opportunity for a > better transition.) Hopefully it will go 100% smooth. 1.7.0 does remove deprecated methods/fields (according to changelog), and I have already fixed the deprecations in my patch. > In any event, I will investigate the remaining rdeps (mediathekview has > been addressed) and can help maintain the patch for freeplane if > desired. Thanks very much for the offer. I don't have problems with maintaining this patch :-) > The larger issue/question about maintaining multiple versions of Java > libraries remains. My instinct is that for jgoodies-forms, it is best > to move forward (that is port rdeps) when possible instead of supporting > the numerous versions out there. Obviously this strategy won't work for > all libraries, but I think it's preferable when feasible. The > alternative is serious archive bloat and cruft. I also don't think it's worth maintaining numerous versions, also because it can easily be fixed. I don't think this is the case for all packages (but I don't have much experience). However, it's important to post here and/or mail the maintainers. In such a post, we could negotiate whether such an additional package is really necessary. Maybe this can be automated, like Emmanuel suggests in Thread "RFS: guava-libraries/14.0.1-1". I think as a first step, a simple mail announcing the upgrade and including the changelog could be mailed to all rdep maintainers (and d-java?) ? Best Regards, -- Felix Natter -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/8738sv3v1k....@bitburger.home.felix
