Re: RFS: args4j/2.0.27-1 - [UPLOADED]

On 04/14/2014 06:38 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Hi all, > > I updated the args4j package to the latest upstream release and I'm > looking for a sponsor to upload it. I disabled the args4j-tools module > which is failing to build with Java 8 (this module isn't required to > build other packages). >

Re: cofoja vs libcofoja-java

On 04/14/2014 09:14 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Le 10/04/2014 09:27, Andreas Tille a écrit : > >> So if there are Debian Java team members who have some preference why >> not recommending this in a policy document? For people who are seldomly >> touching Java packages strict rules would be simply

Re: [libshib-common-java] 02/06: Initial debianisation

Matthew Vernon writes: > On 14/04/14 16:44, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: >> I saw that you mentioned patches managed by Git, do you have some >> documentation on how this is performed exactly? Most of the packages >> I've seen use quilt to manage the patches and I'm not sure I would know >> how to updat

Re: RFS: icu4j-4.4/4.4.2.2-2

On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 12:21:31PM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Hi all, > > I fixed the icu4j-4.4 package to build with Java 8 and I'm looking for a > sponsor to upload it. I'll take care of it. -- Miguel Landaeta, nomadium at debian.org secure email with PGP 0x6E608B637D8967E9 available at h

Re: RFS: ini4j/0.5.2-SNAPSHOT-4

On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 04:16:18PM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > I updated the ini4j package to fix a compilation failure with Java 8 [1] > and I'm looking for a sponsor to upload it. This is yet another conflict > with the new Map.remove(Object, Object) method. I'll take care of it. -- Miguel

Re: cofoja vs libcofoja-java

Hi, On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 06:14:15PM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > > I guess there is a lack of consensus to turn this into a policy. That > sound like an excellent bikeshedding topic that could keep us busy > during the freeze :) I think the best strategy is to write a proposal down since we

Re: cofoja vs libcofoja-java

Le 10/04/2014 09:27, Andreas Tille a écrit : > So if there are Debian Java team members who have some preference why > not recommending this in a policy document? For people who are seldomly > touching Java packages strict rules would be simply helpful. I guess there is a lack of consensus to tu

Re: [libshib-common-java] 02/06: Initial debianisation

Hi, On 14/04/14 16:44, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Le 14/04/2014 15:51, Matthew Vernon a écrit : > >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/debian/source/patch-header >> @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ >> +Subject: Collected Debian patches for libshib-common-java >> +Author: Matthew Vernon >> + >> +The libshib-common-java packag

Re: [libshib-common-java] 02/06: Initial debianisation

Le 14/04/2014 15:51, Matthew Vernon a écrit : > --- /dev/null > +++ b/debian/source/patch-header > @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ > +Subject: Collected Debian patches for libshib-common-java > +Author: Matthew Vernon > + > +The libshib-common-java package is maintained in Git rather than > +maintaining patches

RFS: ini4j/0.5.2-SNAPSHOT-4

Hi all, I updated the ini4j package to fix a compilation failure with Java 8 [1] and I'm looking for a sponsor to upload it. This is yet another conflict with the new Map.remove(Object, Object) method. http://mentors.debian.net/package/ini4j Thank you, Emmanuel Bourg [1] http://87.98.165.193/d

RFS: args4j/2.0.27-1

Hi all, I updated the args4j package to the latest upstream release and I'm looking for a sponsor to upload it. I disabled the args4j-tools module which is failing to build with Java 8 (this module isn't required to build other packages). http://mentors.debian.net/package/args4j Thank you, Emma

RFS: icu4j-4.4/4.4.2.2-2

Hi all, I fixed the icu4j-4.4 package to build with Java 8 and I'm looking for a sponsor to upload it. Here is the changelog: * Fixed build.xml to recognize Java 8 * Do not compile the ICUTaglet class which relies on internal JDK classes no longer available in Java 8. * debian/control: