On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 07:02, Thomas Koch <tho...@koch.ro> wrote: > Hi, > > since I've been asked: I'm currently writing my bachelor thesis and won't > continue working on SBT Debian packaging until after easter holidays. > > However in general I'd strongly suggest that packaging of SBT for a > distribution is only continued, if upstream can be convinced to support a > build path without a previous SBT binary, e.g.: > > 1. build a minimal SBT without SBT > 2. build the full SBT with the minimal SBT from 1. > > I spent a full week to compile SBT without SBT (and learning more about Scala > and SBT). Any third party scripts to bootstrap SBT could break at any time and > require a lot of work to fix, if upstream does not support this build > strategy. > > "Initial attempt to support build without sbt": > https://github.com/harrah/xsbt/pull/308
I'm not quite understanding the issue here. What is the policy in question that is giving you trouble? -- Daniel C. Sobral I travel to the future all the time. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAHyB3VVcFLVP=bszsv0w-4f7--jxg+-dkbhdcjzjv7b-k2s...@mail.gmail.com
