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

Groups > linux.debian.maint.java > #9991

Re: libbatik-java: Changed artifacts?

Show all headers | View raw

Christopher Hoskin <mans0954@debian.org> writes:

> Dear Felix,

hello Christopher,

> Another option would be for me to switch to using maven to build
> batik. I've had a go at this here:
>
> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-java/batik.git/?h=maven-build
>
> In this case, batik-i18n and batik-constants are created as jars in
> their own right under /usr/share/java rather than being bundled into
> other jars. Upstream supports building with maven, although I presume
> they are still using ant for their own binaries as they don't have
> batik-i18n and batik-constants jars?

Thank you for analyzing and fixing the issue with freeplane.
I will fix this in the new release which is already in the pipeline.

> I haven't uploaded the maven build as I don't know if this approach
> might have a negative impact on other reverse dependencies expecting
> the ant layout build?

I would stick with the old (ant) build system, as this means much less
work fixing the r-deps. But whatever you choose is ok for me.
We still should test-build all r-deps to see whether they build though.

>> batik-i18n gets included in the batic-util.jar, but the pom file for
>> batic-util includes:
>>
>>     <dependency>
>>       <groupId>${project.groupId}</groupId>
>>       <artifactId>batik-constants</artifactId>
>>       <version>${project.version}</version>
>>     </dependency>
>>     <dependency>
>>       <groupId>${project.groupId}</groupId>
>>       <artifactId>batik-i18n</artifactId>
>>       <version>${project.version}</version>
>>     </dependency>
>>
>> So my first thought is that this is a problem with the upstream pom files.
>>
>> If I comment out these dependencies and add jython to the build
>> dependencies for freeplane, then the freeplane package builds okay.

Do the people on d-java agree that this is a good solution?
It seems good to me.

One suggestion: If you update a library, it would be good to test
whether any r-dep fails to build. There are not many for the case of
batik.

Cheers and Best Regards,
-- 
Felix Natter
debian/rules!

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

Thread

libbatik-java: Changed artifacts? Felix Natter <fnatter@gmx.net> - 2017-09-09 15:00 +0200
  Re: libbatik-java: Changed artifacts? Christopher Hoskin <mans0954@debian.org> - 2017-09-09 16:30 +0200
    Re: libbatik-java: Changed artifacts? Christopher Hoskin <mans0954@debian.org> - 2017-09-09 18:30 +0200
      Re: libbatik-java: Changed artifacts? Felix Natter <fnatter@gmx.net> - 2017-09-09 19:50 +0200
        Re: libbatik-java: Changed artifacts? Christopher Hoskin <mans0954@debian.org> - 2017-09-09 20:30 +0200
          Re: libbatik-java: Changed artifacts? Markus Koschany <apo@debian.org> - 2017-09-09 20:40 +0200
            Re: libbatik-java: Changed artifacts? Christopher Hoskin <christopher.hoskin@gmail.com> - 2017-09-10 09:10 +0200
              Re: libbatik-java: Changed artifacts? Markus Koschany <apo@debian.org> - 2017-10-22 20:30 +0200
          Re: libbatik-java: Changed artifacts? Eugene Zhukov <eugene@debian.org> - 2017-09-10 08:00 +0200

csiph-web