Re: RFS: libjchart2d-java 3.2.2+dfsg-1 [ITP]
Hi Achim,
On 23.10.2014 06:10, tony mancill wrote:
> On 10/13/2014 06:32 AM, Markus Koschany wrote:
[...]
> Hi Markus,
>
> Things look pretty good with this package. There are a total of (3)
> files that don't carry a license, and all of them are by the same
> upstream author except for this one:
>
> ./jchart2d/src/info/monitorenter/gui/chart/demos/VerticalStackedChartsWithParametricSpirals.java
>
> which is possibly by another author:
>
>> /**
>> * Two charts aligned vertically (via
>> * {@link Chart2D#setSynchronizedXStartChart(Chart2D)}) that display
>> geometric
>> * forms backed by mathematics I do not understand (any more) ;-) .
>> *
>> *
>> *
>> * @author Jason S, modified by Achim Westermann
>> *
>> */
>
> If you have contact with the upstream author, perhaps you could ask for
> clarification? This will probably come up during the NEW queue processing.
we are in the final phase of packaging JChart2D for Debian and we have
reviewed the copyright. All of your files appear to be licensed under
LGPL-2.1 (or later). Three files don't carry a license header currently.
I assumed that they were also licensed under LGPL-2.1 since you are
listed as the author in those files. However
VerticalStackedChartsWithParametricSpirals.java
mentions also a Jason S. and that you modified the file. Could you
clarify what license applies to those files?
jchart2d/src/AffineTransformBug.java
jchart2d/src/info/monitorenter/gui/chart/demos/VerticalStackedChartsWithParametricSpirals.java
jchart2d/test/info/monitorenter/gui/chart/TestChartOperationsVisual.java
Thank you,
Markus
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Tomcat 6 removal
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 02:41:55PM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Hi all, > > I've just uploaded an update of the tomcat6 package that builds only the > Servlet API (libservlet2.5-java) and no longer the server packages > (tomcat6, libtomcat6-java, etc). So even if the src:tomcat6 package is > still part of Jessie we won't have to support the security updates. > > This change will break two packages: > - libjboss-remoting-java: removal pending with jbossas4 (#764250) > - tomcat-maven-plugin: no rdeps, low popcon. To be removed or upgraded > to the version 2.x to fix the build failure. > > All the other packages which were relying on tomcat6 have been updated > to use tomcat7 or tomcat8. Thanks, but wasn't the outcome of the discussion in April "Subject: Tomcat version for jessie" to only ship tomcat8? Cheers, Moritz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141023202852.GA3084@pisco.westfalen.local
Re: Request for review: jackson-datatype-guava packaging
Hi Markus. Apologies for the delay in getting the last couple of fixes in. Here's a highly trimmed list of your suggestions. On 2/10/14 5:21 AM, "Markus Koschany" wrote: >Here a some remarks from my side: >I: jackson-datatype-guava source: debian-watch-file-is-missing >At the moment the sources don't match with > >https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-datatype-guava/archive/jackson-dataty >pe-guava-2.4.2.tar.gz >I: libjackson2-datatype-guava-java: >extended-description-is-probably-too-short >maven.cleanIgnoreRules and maven.publishedRules are empty and could be >removed. >I would shortly explain the purpose of replace-generate.sh in >README.source. >Optional: run »wrap-and-sort -sa« from the devscripts package for >improved readability of debian/control and other files under the debian >directory. >Perhaps you might want to consider to build the javadoc as well and ship >it with > >libjackson2-datatype-guava-java-doc >I haven't checked the unit test issue yet but the rest looks good and >the package builds fine. I managed to get all of this done, including the unit tests but ended up trashing my old repo and overwriting it with a new one. I made a huge mess of the original sources and redid everything using the upstream tar.gz file you pointed to. If there are any checkouts they will need to be deleted and recreated from scratch. Hey that was actually fun, and I think I've figured out a lot about how Java packaging works now. Regards, Tim. > >Cheers, > >Markus > > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Tomcat 6 removal
On 10/23/2014 01:28 PM, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 02:41:55PM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I've just uploaded an update of the tomcat6 package that builds only the >> Servlet API (libservlet2.5-java) and no longer the server packages >> (tomcat6, libtomcat6-java, etc). So even if the src:tomcat6 package is >> still part of Jessie we won't have to support the security updates. >> >> This change will break two packages: >> - libjboss-remoting-java: removal pending with jbossas4 (#764250) >> - tomcat-maven-plugin: no rdeps, low popcon. To be removed or upgraded >> to the version 2.x to fix the build failure. >> >> All the other packages which were relying on tomcat6 have been updated >> to use tomcat7 or tomcat8. > > Thanks, but wasn't the outcome of the discussion in April "Subject: > Tomcat version for jessie" to only ship tomcat8? > > Cheers, > Moritz > Hello Moritz, Yes, this was discussed at one point. However, there was some subsequent discussion about this during DebConf and as part of this thread [1]. The conclusion from the Java Team is that tomcat7 is the right choice for users given the relative newness of tomcat8 and that it is currently under development. Also tomcat8 requires Java 7 or later [2], which will exclude any non-openjdk architecture. Cheers, tony [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-java/2014/08/msg00093.html [2] http://tomcat.apache.org/whichversion.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
