Hello Anton, that is great news! Keeping VTK and ParaView in sync' is not going to be easy:
Sync'ing VTK sources and ParaView's VTK sources and allowing both to be co-installable, increases the maintenance burden for both package maintainers. Especially for Alastair McKinstry, because he would have to copy and adapt all patches from (Debian's) VTK package sources to his ParaView VTK sources. Latest ParaView release is 5.8.1 [1] and that is using a pre-VTK9 development version of VTK [2][3] ?!? The master branch of next ParaView release [4] has VTK 9 [5]. ParaView's release tarballs are published without the VTK subfolder [6], but I am not sure whether that is due to a "bug" [7] of the GitHub release process or if that means it is valid to "mix" different ParaView and VTK releases. ParaView CMakeLists.txt uses VTK's CMake files [8] before considering PARAVIEW_USE_EXTERNAL_VTK [9], hence ParaView requires the VTK subdirectory to be present anyway. For Debian users, it would be beneficial to have VTK and ParaView packages in sync and possibly installed at the same time, because that enables them e.g. 1. run (i)python3 or pvpython and enter 'import vtk' without crashs 2. use find_package(VTK) and find_package(ParaView) in a single CMakeLists.txt without tedious if-else constructs [1] https://gitlab.kitware.com/paraview/paraview/-/tree/v5.8.1 [2] https://gitlab.kitware.com/paraview/paraview/-/commit/ce73a508883c599927967be854ecfbf1562f032f [3] https://gitlab.kitware.com/vtk/vtk/-/blob/da522f73bc0639f8c995b8c89e21d604656f99e2/CMake/vtkVersion.cmake [4] https://gitlab.kitware.com/paraview/paraview [5] https://gitlab.kitware.com/vtk/vtk/-/blob/ae3f586abc4032895ce05e664d4a6ad84f990ef2/CMake/vtkVersion.cmake [6] https://github.com/Kitware/ParaView/releases [7] https://stackoverflow.com/a/34721233/6490710 [8] https://github.com/Kitware/ParaView/blob/v5.8.1/CMakeLists.txt#L98 [9] https://github.com/Kitware/ParaView/blob/v5.8.1/CMakeLists.txt#L218 Best regards Jakob
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
