Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.maint.java > #9897

Re: Notes from the DebConf 17 Java BOF

Show all headers | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

Am 12.08.2017 um 00:06 schrieb Emmanuel Bourg:
> Thank you for the summary Tom. How many people attended the BOF?
> 
> On 08/09/2017 02:50 AM, Tom Marble wrote:
> 
>> 1. Making openjdk-9 the default for buster
>>    - Yes we should try to do this.
>>    - We will gain some fixes for reproducible builds
> 
> Do we know what has improved on the reproducibility side with OpenJDK 9?

I mentioned that you were the one who forwarded reproducibility patches
upstream. So beside from that I'm not sure.

> 
> 
>>    - Chris West has done some excellent work trying to rebuild the
>>      archive with openjdk-9
>>    - FYI: the next Ubuntu LTS in April would like to ship with openjdk-9
> 
> As the default JRE? That would be quite optimistic.

If I recall correctly doku intends to switch the default JRE to Java 9
for Ubuntu 18.04 but OpenJDK 8 will still be available to build packages
from source. This is like something we have done for Wheezy in the past.
We support the runtime environment but if something has to be rebuilt
from source an older version of the JDK has to be used.

>> 4. Clojure
>>    - Currently does not have JDK 9 support
>>    - The Clojure Team will look into this with upstream
> 
> Did you discuss if we keep the Java and Clojure teams/packages under the
> same umbrella?

We discussed this matter during the Clojure BoF. I said we would prefer
(meaning we would be happy about it) that the Clojure team maintained
their packages under the Java team umbrella. We already have all the
infrastructure in place like mailing lists and Git repositories. However
the Clojure team prefers to use a separate bug mailing list just to
avoid all the high amount of traffic we receive every day.

I suggested that both teams should grant access to each others
repositories which would simplify collaboration and it appeared to me
that everyone agreed to this proposal.

>> 5. javadoc
>>    - Our packages that are standards 4.0.1 compliant should support
>>     "nodoc"
> 
> maven-debian-helper will support the "nodoc" option in the next update,
> but some help from debhelper is still required to make it work with no
> other modification to the existing packages (see #871822).
> 
> 
>>    - Some users appreciate offline access to docs
> 
> I would add that we spent a non negligible amount of time maintaining
> these rarely used packages and dealing with their reproducibility
> issues. Besides the JDK and some very popular libraries I think we
> should drop them.

I agree that most of the reproducibility issues are related to javadoc
packages. However in my opinion this is something which should be fixed
upstream. As you said we should provide documentation for the most
popular Java packages and the JDK but simple Java packages don't really
need it. I'm more in favor to apply this rule for future packages but I
don't think we should drop -doc packages for older packages as long as
they don't become a real burden.

> 6. Autopkgtest
>>    - We should use this more
>>    - Can include built-in tests
>>    - We can (or autopkgtest already does) use 'ratt' to test reverse deps
> 
> My understanding of autopkgtest was that it wasn't meant to execute the
> test suite already run at build time (i.e. mvn test). Maybe it could be
> used to run the Maven integration tests instead?

I'm not sure about this. I believe it would be a good start to implement
autopkgtest for our most important packages first. Something like
checking whether r-deps break or not would be an improvement. On the
other hand I am quite impressed by the current state of bug reports from
the reproducibility team, so maybe we could focus on something else first.

Markus

Back to linux.debian.maint.java | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Notes from the DebConf 17 Java BOF Tom Marble <tmarble@info9.net> - 2017-08-09 03:00 +0200
  Re: Notes from the DebConf 17 Java BOF Markus Koschany <apo@debian.org> - 2017-08-10 17:30 +0200
    Re: Notes from the DebConf 17 Java BOF Felix Natter <fnatter@gmx.net> - 2017-08-12 09:30 +0200
  Re: Notes from the DebConf 17 Java BOF Emmanuel Bourg <ebourg@apache.org> - 2017-08-12 00:20 +0200
    Re: Notes from the DebConf 17 Java BOF Carnë Draug <carandraug+dev@gmail.com> - 2017-08-12 03:00 +0200
      Re: Notes from the DebConf 17 Java BOF Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> - 2017-08-13 03:30 +0200
    Re: Notes from the DebConf 17 Java BOF Tom Marble <tmarble@info9.net> - 2017-08-12 15:20 +0200
    Re: Notes from the DebConf 17 Java BOF Markus Koschany <apo@debian.org> - 2017-08-15 01:00 +0200
    Re: Notes from the DebConf 17 Java BOF Frederic Bonnard <frediz@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-08-16 10:10 +0200
      Re: Notes from the DebConf 17 Java BOF Emmanuel Bourg <ebourg@apache.org> - 2017-08-16 23:00 +0200
        Re: Notes from the DebConf 17 Java BOF Frederic Bonnard <frediz@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-08-17 10:00 +0200
      Re: Notes from the DebConf 17 Java BOF tony mancill <tmancill@debian.org> - 2017-08-16 23:50 +0200
        Re: Notes from the DebConf 17 Java BOF Frederic Bonnard <frediz@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-08-17 10:20 +0200
          Re: Notes from the DebConf 17 Java BOF tony mancill <tmancill@debian.org> - 2017-08-22 06:50 +0200
            Re: Notes from the DebConf 17 Java BOF Frederic Bonnard <frediz@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-08-22 16:20 +0200
      Re: Notes from the DebConf 17 Java BOF Frederic Bonnard <frediz@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-08-18 14:30 +0200

csiph-web