Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Andreas Tille Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.java Subject: Re: Upgrading freehep to latest upstream (needed by cdk and probably others) Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 07:00:02 +0200 Message-ID: References: X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-java-request@lists.debian.org Tue Apr 21 04:58:34 2020 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-7 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, LDO_WHITELIST=-5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: using cached result; rate: -3.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22142 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/20200421045819.GH31086@an3as.eu Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 37 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Cc: Debian Java List , Giovanni Mascellani , Philipp Huebner , Onkar Shinde X-Original-Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 06:58:19 +0200 X-Original-Message-ID: <20200421045819.GH31086@an3as.eu> X-Original-References: <20200415125323.GP22823@an3as.eu> <2293b1fb-4e63-8697-dec4-74f06cad0019@gmail.com> Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.java:11576 Hi Andrius, On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 10:18:04AM +0300, merkys@debian.org wrote: > Some time ago I had attempted packaging new freehep-vectorgraphics, with > considerable success. However, I dropped the ball and did not upload it. > I have pushed my packaging to salsa [1]. Thanks a lot for the promising hint. > There is one issue, though. Old freehep-* JARs are split into multitude > of source and binary packages, while my packaging uses single source > package (I find it more convenient than splitting and linking) and > currently puts all the JARs in one binary package. One of the following > options has to be chosen: > > 1. Have only one binary package. This would have to replace all old > binary packages with Conflicts+Replaces. > > 2. Split JARs to resemble old binary packages. AFAIK, this would require > epoch (1:) for the new binary packages, as they would come from > different source package. > > I would probably go with the option 2. I admit I have no strong opinion on this as long as we will get a feature complete cjk package. Since you also are maintaining cjk would you volunteer to care for this? This would be really appreciated as a contribution to our covid-19 effort. Kind regards Andreas. > [1] https://salsa.debian.org/java-team/freehep-vectorgraphics -- http://fam-tille.de