Am 03.02.2016 um 17:27 schrieb Emmanuel Bourg:
> Le 3/02/2016 13:53, Markus Koschany a écrit :
>
>> I like having one source package src:groovy that always provides the
>> latest upstream release and all its reverse-dependencies shall always
>> work flawlessly with it. Amen. :-)
>
> +1
>
> The u
Le 3/02/2016 13:53, Markus Koschany a écrit :
> I like having one source package src:groovy that always provides the
> latest upstream release and all its reverse-dependencies shall always
> work flawlessly with it. Amen. :-)
+1
The user experience is important to me, and I think 'apt-get instal
Hi,
Am 02.02.2016 um 18:11 schrieb Emmanuel Bourg:
> Hi all,
>
> Jenkins is going to be removed, this is the last dependency on the
> groovy package. This opens the question of the groovy and groovy2
> packages. Should we:
>
> 1. Remove groovy and keep only groovy2. We may later reuse groovy for
On Tue, 2016-02-02 at 18:11 +0100, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> 2. Reuse groovy to package the next version of Groovy 2.x and then
> remove groovy2 (we keep the 2.x artifact to avoid updating all the
> reverse dependencies)
>
> 3. Turn groovy into a dummy package depending on groovy2. The groovy
> pack
I'm not aware of the implications but if it's just opinion you ask: dump
groovy 1. Groovy 2.x should build a lot of packages build with groovy 1.8.
Regards,
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi all,
Jenkins is going to be removed, this is the last dependency on the
groovy package. This opens the question of the groovy and groovy2
packages. Should we:
1. Remove groovy and keep only groovy2. We may later reuse groovy for an
upcoming version 3.0.
2. Reuse groovy to package the next ver
Le 2/02/2016 18:42, Ioan Eugen Stan a écrit :
> I'm not aware of the implications but if it's just opinion you ask: dump
> groovy 1. Groovy 2.x should build a lot of packages build with groovy 1.8.
Actually the transition to Groovy 2 is already done and Groovy 1.x will
go away in Stretch. The ques
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 3:06 PM, Miguel Landaeta wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 08:52:12PM -0300, Miguel Landaeta wrote:
> > What I intend to do is to upload Groovy 2.1.6 to experimental very
> > soon, test all the reverse dependencies there and file bugs (if
> > needed) on incompatible packages
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 08:52:12PM -0300, Miguel Landaeta wrote:
> What I intend to do is to upload Groovy 2.1.6 to experimental very
> soon, test all the reverse dependencies there and file bugs (if
> needed) on incompatible packages.
I uploaded Groovy 2.1.6 to experimental and I rebuilt freeplan
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 07:12:06PM +0100, Felix Natter wrote:
> hello Miguel,
Hi Felix,
> Do you happen to know whether groovy 2.1.6 is backwards compatible with
> groovy 1.8.6?
I'm not sure about this but I'd not be surprised to find at least a
few breaking changes.
What I intend to do is to
hello Miguel,
> groovy 2.1.6 is now building with Debian libraries but the package is
> not ready to be uploaded yet since: it's not compliant with our team
Do you happen to know whether groovy 2.1.6 is backwards compatible with
groovy 1.8.6?
I am the maintainer of the Freeplane package, which m
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 08:31:41PM +0200, Ioan Eugen Stan wrote:
> Hello Miguel,
>
> I'm Ioan Eugen Stan and I'm interested in having Groovy 2.0 packaged for
> Debian.
Hi Ioan, nice to meet you.
> This is not my first attempt with Debian Java packaging but I don't
> wish to quit until I see it
Hello Miguel,
I'm Ioan Eugen Stan and I'm interested in having Groovy 2.0 packaged for Debian.
I use Debian for some yeaers now on my laptop and also n most server
machines that I command. Besides Debian I'm a Java/Groovy/JVM
developer and would like to see better support in this regard in
Debian
13 matches
Mail list logo
