gmane.linux.debian.devel.java

RFS: solr 1.4.1+dfsg1-3 (updated)

James Page — 2012-05-25T08:43:35

Hi Team

I am looking for a sponsor for an update to the package "solr".

* Package name    : solr
  Version         : 1.4.1+dfsg1-3

This update addresses the important/confirmed issues in the Debian bugtracker
and integrates changes from Ubuntu.

In addition I will be picking up the maintenance of this package until I
complete work on solr3/lucene3. I would like to re-introduce this to wheezy
before freeze.

I have uploaded to git.debian.org:
 - ssh://git.debian.org/git/pkg-java/solr.git
 - http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-java/solr.git

It would be great if someone could review, upload and tag this package for me.

The DMUA field is already set in this package which I assume means I will be able
to upload it in the future - if this is not the case please could the appropriate
action be taken to allow this.

Thanks

James

RFS: solr 1.4.1+dfsg1-3 (updated)

James Page — 2012-05-25T08:26:37

Hi Team

I am looking for a sponsor for an update to the package "solr".

* Package name    : solr
  Version         : 1.4.1+dfsg1-3

This update addresses the important/confirmed issues in the Debian bugtracker
and integrates changes from Ubuntu.

In addition I will be picking up the maintenance of this package until I 
complete work on solr3/lucene3. I would like to re-introduce this to wheezy
before freeze.

I have uploaded to git.debian.org:
 - ssh://git.debian.org/git/pkg-java/solr.git
 - http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-java/solr.git

It would be great if someone could review, upload and tag this package for me.

The DMUA field is already set in this package which I assume means I will be able
to upload it in the future - if this is not the case please could the appropriate 
action be taken to allow this.

Thanks

James

Re: RFS: libcommons-codec-java 1.6-1 (updated)

James Page — 2012-05-25T07:53:19

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 25/05/12 01:16, Damien Raude-Morvan wrote:

Which is odd - I was able to build in a clean sid sbuild schroot
without this fix.  Tony had the same issue as you did I think.


Thanks for sponsoring.

Cheers

James


- -- 
James Page
Ubuntu Core Developer
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=BnUF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: RFS: libcommons-codec-java 1.6-1 (updated)

Damien Raude-Morvan — 2012-05-25T00:16:54

Hi James,

Le mercredi 23 mai 2012 13:03:19, James Page a écrit :
[...]

Uploaded (with a small fix to classpath to allow build into an sbuild chroot).


Done.

Good night.

Re: RFS: eclipse-mylyn 3.7.1-1 [Uploaded]

Niels Thykier — 2012-05-24T10:14:07


It was a bit of git-fail in my end, sorry for that.  Uploaded.  :)

~Niels

Re: RFS: cdk 1.4.9-1

Niels Thykier — 2012-05-24T07:54:05

Seems like a plausible reason.  :)


Personally I have no issues with targetting this for experimental; in
fact I think it makes perfect sense to use experimental for possible
API/ABI issues[1].

~Niels

[1] https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ReleaseTeam/Transitions

"""
[...], you are more than welcome (and even encouraged) to use experimental.
"""

Re: RFS: cdk 1.4.9-1

Onkar Shinde — 2012-05-24T04:25:46

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 7:53 PM, Egon Willighagen
<egon.willighagen< at >gmail.com> wrote:

I will look into the build failure over weekend. I think one reason
might be that I forgot to clean javadocs in the clean target in
d/rules.


A quick check of packages suggests that openbabel and rdkit are recent
enough for cinfony 1.1. But it seems to have gained new
(build)dependencies. So I am not sure how easy the task will be for
packaging latest cinfony.
Given this scenario, my suggestion is to target the cdk packaging for
'experimental' and then file a wishlist bug against cinfony for the
upgrade request (or simply test current version against new cdk). If
we are lucky then both will make into archives before freeze. Let me
know what you think.

Cheers,
Onkar

Re: RFS: eclipse-mylyn 3.7.1-1 (new upstream release)

Jakub Adam — 2012-05-23T15:17:54

Hi Niels,

On 23.5.2012 08:30, Niels Thykier wrote:

I'm not sure what you mean, pristine-tar branch points to data for
eclipse-mylyn_3.7.1.orig.tar.bz2 [1]. Can you be more specific what's the
problem?


Seems that plugin was dropped in 3.7.0, so the override file is now useless.
Removed.

Regards,

Jakub

[1] http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-java/eclipse-mylyn.git;a=commit;h=136eb6d75900aac6764c8a5bf3cb0acd88ae95ee

Re: RFS: cdk 1.4.9-1

Egon Willighagen — 2012-05-23T14:23:24

I'm happy to look at a full error report! (Not sure I can get around
to setting up an environment for building it myself... (I've done it
in the past, but have to relearn the steps each time...)


Except that the python-cinfony package needs updating too, and that
may imply having to updated rdkit and openbabel as well... (nothing
wrong with that, of course! :)

Egon

Re: RFS: cdk 1.4.9-1

Niels Thykier — 2012-05-23T14:15:33

The issue is that it fails to clean properly - at least some (java)doc
files are not cleaned, but also some non-text files (can't remember - I
didn't pay too much attention to it).  I haven't actually investigated
the failure that deeply, so it may be trivial to fix.  :)


Good to know, looks like the reverse-dependencies will not pose an issue
then.  :)

~Niels

Re: RFS: cdk 1.4.9-1

Egon Willighagen — 2012-05-23T14:07:20

Hi Niels,

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Niels Thykier <niels< at >thykier.net> wrote:

Ah, right! Yes, from 1.2 to 1.4 there are API changes...

Please do provide me details about build fails... part of it is prob
Debian specific, but some perhaps also CDK specific... the latter I
like to hear about :)




Yes, this one has seen a major rewrite in 1.4.


Thanx for the detail!


Yes, some source code files are generated indeed.


Stupid of me to forget about Cinfony!

Cinfony 1.1 should work fine with CDK 1.4.x:
http://baoilleach.blogspot.com/2011/12/cinfony-11-released.html

That post tells about a compile against 1.4.5, but as said, within
1.4.x there are no API changes (or very minor ones).

Egon

Re: RFS: cdk 1.4.9-1

Niels Thykier — 2012-05-23T12:45:47

Hi,

I "just" read the diff between our current version (1.2.10) and the RFS
version 1.4.9.  Actually, thanks you just made me realize that it FTBFS
when built twice in a row!

Anyhow, it is quite possible that I saw false positives as I just read
the diff once without considering new interfaces/super classes and
whether the methods were "defined internal" (despite being public).
Anyhow, to mention examples:

PartialFilledStructureMerger:
 -public IAtomContainer generate() throws CDKException
 +public IAtomContainer generate(IAtomContainerSet atomContainers)
         throws CDKException

SmilesParser:
 -private IAtom assembleAtom(String s) throws InvalidSmilesException
 +private IAtom assembleAtom(String s, IAtom lastNode, boolean
          bondExists) throws InvalidSmilesException

CDKSourceCodeWriter*:
-public void writeAtomContainer(IAtomContainer molecule)
         throws Exception {
+private void writeAtomContainer(IAtomContainer molecule)
         throws Exception {


IChemObjectBuilder lost a lof interface methods and it does not extend
any other interface that could have gained those methods.

IBond:
-public int getStereo();
+public IBond.Stereo getStereo();

These are examples of what I found; they may (or may not) be an issue.
I also noticed now that some of the files disappearing appears to
auto-generated JJTree or so?  Anyway, with the clean rule not working my
diff is currently a bit tainted.


*) Probably intended to be private from the beginning, but changing the
visiblity from public -> private is a possible source of breakage.


For reverse dependencies (not including build-depends) I notice at least
3 (potentional) rdeps in Debian:

$ apt-cache rdepends libcdk-java
libcdk-java
Reverse Depends:
  debichem-cheminformatics
  science-chemistry
  python-cinfony

Actually, the first two turns out to be meta-packages, but
python-cinfony appears to be a genuine reverse dependency.

~Niels

Re: RFS: cdk 1.4.9-1

Egon Willighagen — 2012-05-23T11:37:46

NIels,

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Niels Thykier <niels< at >thykier.net> wrote:

Which ones are those? The 1.4 series should be API stable... I love to
hear how you tested that!


I do not think there are any reverse dependencies... ? I wish there
were, and I hope Bioclipse will be one of those; but at this moment I
cannot think of any... I cannot find right now where to find that rev
dep info...

Egon

RFS: libcommons-codec-java 1.6-1 (updated)

James Page — 2012-05-23T11:03:19

Hi Team

I am looking for a sponsor for an update to the package "libcommons-codec-java".

* Package name    : libcommons-codec-java
  Version         : 1.6-1

This update includes a new upstream release which implements features required
to support packaging of lucene 3.6.0 which I am currently working on.

The upstream release includes four additional bug fixes, migration to Java5 and
an upgrade to use junit4 as well as the require new codec for lucene3.

I have uploaded to git.debian.org:
 - svn+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-java/trunk/libcommons-codec-java
 - http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-java/trunk/libcommons-codec-java

It would be great if someone could reviewi, upload and tag this package for me.

It would also be great if the DMUA field could be set so I can upload this
package in the future.

Thanks

James

Re: Transition from junit to junit4

Arnaud Vandyck — 2012-05-23T08:18:33

Le 6/05/12 15:25, Onkar Shinde a écrit :

Hi,


Is there a list published on some wiki to know who works on which package?

Are there priority packages?

I'd like to help but I made my last package a long time ago! I first
have to read some docs on the new practices. Any link to help? ;-)

Regards

Re: RFS: cdk 1.4.9-1

Niels Thykier — 2012-05-23T08:04:25

Hi,

It seems that some public methods are changing signature and also that
some public constants are disappearing in this release (compared to our
current version).  Have you (build-)tested the reverse dependencies of cdk?

The new doc package does not get any recommends despite using jh_depends
- I am not entirely sure what goes wrong because the javadoc is at least
linked against default-jdk-doc and at first sight the d/control looks
correct.

~Niels

Re: Transition from junit to junit4

Niels Thykier — 2012-05-23T07:36:47

Hi,

Sorry for the silence on my part.

Personally I would be okay with migrating to junit4 if junit4 is
backwards compatible and it means we can get rid of junit3.  It is
probably too late for Wheezy, but I see no problem in already starting now.

~Niels

Re: RFS: eclipse-anyedit 2.4.2-1 [Uploaded]

Niels Thykier — 2012-05-23T07:33:42

Uploaded, thanks for the changes. :)

~Niels

Re: RFS: eclipse-linuxtools 0.10.0-1 (new)

Niels Thykier — 2012-05-23T07:13:35

libhover/org.eclipse.linuxtools.cdt.libhover.glibc/data/glibc-2.7-2.libhover
is under GFDL-1.1 (according to the Changelog in
libhover/org.eclipse.linuxtools.cdt.libhover.glibc), but does not appear
as such in d/copyright.

GFDL is non-free unless it has no invariant sections[1] (in that case,
please use GFDL-NIV in d/copyright)[2].
  Also, I highly doubt that the copyright of GFDL files are """Eclipse
Linux Tools project""" - knowing upstream they have a *very* strong
preference for EPL, so if they owned the files it would almost certainly
be EPL.  Failing that, it would be a license with "Eclipse" painted all
over it (like their "Eclipse BSD/MIT" variant) or Apache-2.
  I am more inclined to believe they copy-pasted it from other projects,
which means there should be a copyright statement from the
creators/copyright holders of these files somewhere in the sources (I
haven't found it though).  If not, I am certain upstream are more than
willing to clarify the copyright of those files (given their IP rules it
should in fact be piece of cake for them).


What are *.dash files[3], do they come with a source and a way to
generate them?

~Niels

[1] http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_001#outcome

It does not seem like they declare any invariant sections, so it should
be ok.

[2] http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/#license-specification

[3]
./systemtap/org.eclipse.linuxtools.systemtap.ui.dashboard/modules/*.dash

Re: RFS: eclipse-mylyn 3.7.1-1 (new upstream release)

Niels Thykier — 2012-05-23T06:30:46

Hi,

I see the pristine-tar branch is at eclipse-mylyn/3.6.5+dfsg1 - is that
intentional?

Also, there is a lintian override for
 usr/share/eclipse/dropins/mylyn/eclipse/plugins/org.eclipse.mylyn_*.jar

but it does not appear to be installed in the package.  Should the
override be dropped or is the install missing a file?

~Niels

Re: spring-security 3.x packaging

Miguel Landaeta — 2012-05-22T20:04:48

My time is limited at the moment but I can easily finish this package.


Let's use 3.1, let's try to don't ship too outdated libraries with wheezy.

There is no need to start the git repo over, but even in that event
just remember this package is almost completely debianized already so
please avoid any work duplication.

I can keep you updated about this during the week.

Regards,