[pkg-eucalyptus-maintainers] Bug#681923: Bug#681923: some comments on the packaging

[Steffen Möller]

On 07/25/2012 04:28 AM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 04:35:26PM +0200, Thomas Koch a écrit :
>> a new version of libjson-simple-java is available in unstable which now 
>> correctly installs its maven artifacts so I tried to fix my patch for gwt.
>>
>> I have to give up for now. Several things made me crazy:
>>
>> - Do you like CDBS? It drives me crazy. It's so complicate! Wouldn't you like 
>> to switch to debhelper?
>>
>> - I would need to add maven-repo-helper to the mix, but you already use 
>> javahelper and the CDBS lib of javahelper and I haven't manage to get it to 
>> work yet. - I know how to do it with debhelper.
>>
>> - Usually, debian-java people use one git repository for one Debian source 
>> package. The repo on github[1] includes several packages.
>>
>> - Then you could also use pristine-tar to add the upstream tarball to the Git 
>> repo and have the upstream tarball also committed to an upstream branch of the 
>> Git repo.
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/eucalyptus/eucalyptus-debian 
>>
>> Would you like to switch the gwt packaging to Git?
> maybe the other team members can correct me, but one reason the packages were
> tranferred to GitHub was that we did not realise that the Debian java team had
> a Git area on Alioth.  Sorry for this !
Why am I the last man supporting subversion for packaging.
> Can somebody transfer the package (with full upstream source included and a
> pristine-tar branch) as git://git.debian.org/pkg-java/gwt.git ?  Or if you need
> some help, please let me know (but remind me also what are the starting points as
> repositories for the conversion).
I admit to completely have lost oversight about where what package is
maintained. But Chris can certainly help out ... if not on something as
nasty as a vacation.
> About javahelper, I guess that it would be find to convert the package from
> CDBS to debhelper, as the CDBS-specific part of debian/rules is quite small.  Can
> another team member confirm ?
Are you aiming at Wheezy? If not, then I suggest to just go for it. If yes,
then there is little incentive on our side here to possibly break the
reverse
dependencies without the chance to adjust those before the doors have
closed completely. But anything that is invariant to what is working today
should be fine, I tend to think.

Steffen