rote:
> Package: solr-common
> Version: 1.2.0+ds2-5
> Severity: wishlist
>
> It would be much more comfortable for us to contribute to the packaging,
> if you could use a DVCS.
> I already started a packaging repository with GIT and would provide help
> for the migration
Hi all,
I've bitten the bullet and converted the solr work in the pkg-java svn
to a new git (central) repository. There was already a directory
/git/pkg-java on Alioth; I've created a solr.git repository beneath it.
The process following
http://wiki.debian.org/Alioth/Git#ConvertaSVNAliothreposit
Vincent Fourmond wrote:
> Absolutely. We don't want two different repositories for one
> package. Make sure to update the Vcs-* fields.
>
> I'm wondering: would it be a good idea to remove everything but to
> leave a dummy file in pkg-java/trunk/solr stating that the packaging
> has been moved
Torsten Werner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
>
>> I'm wondering: would it be a good idea to remove everything but to
>> leave a dummy file in pkg-java/trunk/solr stating that the packaging
>> has been moved to a git repository ?
>>
> I recommend
/
unstable/" to your /etc/apt/sources.list
Jan-Pascal
--
Jan-Pascal van Best
janpas...@vanbest.org, janpas...@vanbest.eu
http://www.vanbest.org/janpascal/
GPG key fingerprint 4617 E5FB C56D ACB6 7C8C DE64 3A4C B270 1A89 CC23
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org
On Mon, December 21, 2009 11:13, Thomas Koch wrote:
> @solr-dev: Could sbd. from upstream help us out with a working
> tomcat.policy
> for solr? For now I just granted all permissions to solr.
What I did for Solr 1.3 was to look in the log files where it got stuck,
add those permissions, and try ag
ed? Are you sure any failed tests do not
indicate a broken install for some usage scenario?
That's it for know, more when I find a few round tuits.
Jan-Pascal
PS. Since I'm only a DM and not a DD, I can't upload this package (it
renames solr-tomcat6 to solr-tomcat, hence introduces a n
Hi all,
Lucene 3 has been out for a while. It is not backwards compatible with
lucene2 (use of Java5 generics, drop deprecated APIs). What should we do
with this in Debian?
1. Have a big-bang transition in which we patch al rdeps of lucene2 to
work with lucene3.
- I'm not sure if this is even pos
On Wed, August 11, 2010 22:48, Ludovic Claude wrote:
>
> I think that a separate lucene3 package will be required, as there is no
> guaranty that with the API changes an upgrade will work as expected.
Agreed. I'll prepare a new lucene3 package. I'll try to implement the
recommendations from the "Li
On Thu, August 12, 2010 09:54, Niels Thykier wrote:
> I just realised that a likely side effect of implementing this idea is
> that we can no longer allow programs to ship jar files in
> /usr/share/java and instead these must be moved to a separate library
> package (or moved to /usr/share/$pkg).
On Thu, August 12, 2010 11:26, Niels Thykier wrote:
> The reason is that if the library is in /usr/share/java it would be
> considered a public library (just as C libraries in /usr/lib) and
> therefore it would need to be in a library package to declare its ABI
> version[1]. You cannot do that with
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Jan-Pascal van Best"
* Package name: lucene3
Version : 3.0.2
Upstream Author : Doug Cutting , Erik Hatcher
, Otis Gospodnetic et.al.
Copyright holder: The Apache Software Foundation
* URL : http://lucene.apach
Hi all,
Having less interest, and less time, for working on the Lucene and Solr
packages has convinced me it will be better for the team, or someone else,
to take over. Lucene2 is in a reasonable shape. I've started work on
lucene3 (it's in SVN), which builds from source, but cannot find the time
On 08/16/2011 05:50 PM, Torsten Werner wrote:
> Hi Jan-Pascal,
>
> thank you for your work in the past! Should we remove you from the
> Alioth project?
Please do.
> Do you plan to remove your name from the Uploaders
> fields and commit such changes to the VCS repos with an unreleased
> changelog e
Dear all,
I'l working on packaging Solr, an enterprise search server built on
Lucene. The Solr upstream source distribution contains a number of
third-party libraries (see list at the end). I think (but I'll check) that
they are all DFSG-free. I would like to use the Debian-packaged versions
of th
On Tue, June 5, 2007 16:08, Marcus Better wrote:
> Jan-Pascal van Best wrote:
>> What is the policy about this issue?
>
> It's generally not acceptable to duplicate code, so Debian versions of
libraries should be used.
That's what I thought, but what do we do about the
On Tue, June 5, 2007 16:31, Marcus Better wrote:
>> That's what I thought, but what do we do about the 'moving
>> target'-argument?
>
> You will have to check carefully that the dependencies are satisfied and
> monitor changes. Pretty much same as any other package.
The difference is that solr has
Hi all,
The Lucene team has reached the point of almost releasing 2.2 There is
currently a vote on releasing a release candidate as final. I've updated
the Debian Lucene package to release 2.2. I'm not a DD, release 2.1 has
been sponsored by Jeff Breidenbach. Could someone on this list please
have
Dear Debian Java developers,
(semi-crosspost from debian-mentors)
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "commons-csv".
* Package name: commons-csv
Version : 0.1-SNAPSHOT
Upstream Author : Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Martin van den Bemt
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL
19 matches
Mail list logo
