Re: FOSDEM 19 Debian Java talk

2019-02-01 Thread Markus Koschany

Am 01.02.19 um 23:53 schrieb Emmanuel Bourg:
> Le 01/02/2019 à 22:41, Markus Koschany a écrit :
> 
>> It is not very important but if you have some spare time in the next month
>> we could figure this out and create some sort of statistics page like
>>
>> https://blends.debian.org/games/maintstats/
>>
>> just with more information and for fun.
> 
> The same charts are generated for the Java Team if that helps:
> 
> http://blends.debian.net/liststats/authorstat_debian-java.png
> http://blends.debian.net/liststats/authorstat_pkg-java-maintainers.png
> http://blends.debian.net/liststats/bugs_pkg-java.png
> http://blends.debian.net/liststats/commitstat_pkg-java.png
> http://blends.debian.net/liststats/maintainer_per_package_pkg-java.png
> 

Ah, interesting. I think the bugs closed graph is the most interesting
one. I always had the feeling the bugs rate increased at an exponential
rate for me. Still that would be more than 1000 bugs closed in the past
two years for all of us. I have to find a way to verify that at some
point in time but it doesn't feel too absurd right now.

Thanks,

Markus




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: FOSDEM 19 Debian Java talk

2019-02-01 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
Le 01/02/2019 à 22:41, Markus Koschany a écrit :

> It is not very important but if you have some spare time in the next month
> we could figure this out and create some sort of statistics page like
> 
> https://blends.debian.org/games/maintstats/
> 
> just with more information and for fun.

The same charts are generated for the Java Team if that helps:

http://blends.debian.net/liststats/authorstat_debian-java.png
http://blends.debian.net/liststats/authorstat_pkg-java-maintainers.png
http://blends.debian.net/liststats/bugs_pkg-java.png
http://blends.debian.net/liststats/commitstat_pkg-java.png
http://blends.debian.net/liststats/maintainer_per_package_pkg-java.png

Emmanuel Bourg



Re: FOSDEM 19 Debian Java talk

2019-02-01 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
Le 01/02/2019 à 22:46, Markus Koschany a écrit :

> What numbers do we have if you include the libraries too?

These numbers include the libraries (but they weren't listed above).


> Hmm. Why is this different from
> 
> https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?email=pkg-java-maintainers%40lists.alioth.debian.org
> 
> The page lists 1191 packages in main.

Because it includes oldstable+stable+testing+unstable. 1003 is for
testing only.

That said, I forgot to include the new Clojure packages. It brings
Leiningen 2.8.1 to the list of available build tools, and the numbers
become:

  Total packages added to testing: 195
  Total packages removed from testing: 95
  Total packages updated in testing: 296
  Total packages upgraded in testing: 291

  Number of packages in stable: 932
  Number of packages in testing: 1033 (+10,84%)

Emmanuel Bourg



Re: FOSDEM 19 Debian Java talk

2019-02-01 Thread Markus Koschany


Am 01.02.19 um 21:39 schrieb Emmanuel Bourg:
> Le 01/02/2019 à 14:28, Emmanuel Bourg a écrit :

Great. Thanks!

> Total packages added to testing: 179
> Total packages removed from testing: 95
> Total packages updated in testing: 291
> Total packages upgraded in testing: 283

What numbers do we have if you include the libraries too?


> Number of packages maintained: 1003

Hmm. Why is this different from

https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?email=pkg-java-maintainers%40lists.alioth.debian.org

The page lists 1191 packages in main.

Cheers,

Markus



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: FOSDEM 19 Debian Java talk

2019-02-01 Thread Markus Koschany
Hi!

Am 01.02.19 um 14:28 schrieb Emmanuel Bourg:
> Hi Markus,
> 
> Le 29/01/2019 à 19:00, Markus Koschany a écrit :
> 
>> I will attend FOSDEM 19 in Brussels this weekend (03.02.2019, 12:40
>> local time) and give a lightning talk (15 min) about our heroics.
>>
>> https://fosdem.org/2019/schedule/event/debian_java/
> 
> Thanks a lot for holding that talk. I won't be able to attend by I can
> make some suggestions.

Would have been great to see you there. Next time!

>> Naturally there is not enough time to explain everything in detail but
>> it should be adequate to put our message across. Here is your chance.
>> What do you consider important or what would you like other people from
>> the community to know?
> 
> You could maybe summarize the upcoming Java related changes in Buster. I
> started thinking about a blog post on this topic, the freeze is the good
> time to publish it. Some items worth mentioning:
> - the transition to OpenJDK 11 and the massive effort involved (more
> than 400 package updates the last time I counted)
> - the state of the build tools. Ant and Maven are up to date, Gradle is
> stuck at the last pre-Kotlin version. SBT still being worked on.
> - the state of the JVM languages: Groovy 2.14, Scala 2.11.12 (2.12
> requires SBT), Clojure 1.9. Kotlin is wanted but difficult to bootstrap.
> - the state of the IDEs: Eclipse is gone (lack of maintainers), Netbeans 10
> - on the application servers side: Jetty 9.4 and Tomcat 9, fully up to
> date, and now with systemd integration.
> - the reproducibility rate is now around 85% (Stretch was around 75%).

Perfect. Will be mentioned.


>> I would like to reuse some of the scripts that we used for our last blog
>> post in 2016 [1] to fetch some packaging statistics. Are those scripts
>> still available? Otherwise I intend to use UDD a lot.
> 
> I have a script that compares the packages between two releases but I
> haven't published it yet. I'll run it and post the result for the
> stretch/testing differences (it doesn't addresses the maintainer/bug
> counts though).

I tried to gather some fine grained statistics about bugs and used

https://udd.debian.org/bugs/

for that. However the results appear very strange to me. There is even a
selection for "Java team". I just wanted the total bugs reported in the
past 600 days and all RC bugs and all RC bugs fixed (done). It is not
very important but if you have some spare time in the next month we
could figure this out and create some sort of statistics page like

https://blends.debian.org/games/maintstats/

just with more information and for fun.


>> What specific OpenJDK changes caused the most grief?
> 
> - New layout of the JDK installation
> - Removal of tools.jar
> - Removal of the JavaEE APIs (activation, JAXB, JAXWS...)
> - Removal of javah
> - javac source/target pre 1.6 removal.
> - ByteBuffer return type changes (Java 11 compiled code breaks with 8)
> - sun.misc.Unsafe breaking changes
> - Javadoc pendantic errors, JQuery embedding
> 
> But let's not rant too much and keep the talk positive :)

I can't promise that. :)


>> Why we all love JavaDoc? :E
> 
> Grrr :)

:)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: FOSDEM 19 Debian Java talk

2019-02-01 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
Le 01/02/2019 à 14:28, Emmanuel Bourg a écrit :

> I have a script that compares the packages between two releases but I
> haven't published it yet. I'll run it and post the result for the
> stretch/testing differences.

Here is the summary for the stretch -> testing changes (the libraries
are not listed) :

Packages removed from testing:

 * androidsdk-tools
 * eclipse
 * eclipse-anyedit
 * eclipse-cdt
 * eclipse-cdt-pkg-config
 * eclipse-eclox
 * eclipse-egit
 * eclipse-gef
 * eclipse-linuxtools
 * eclipse-mercurialeclipse
 * eclipse-mylyn
 * eclipse-mylyn-tasks-github
 * eclipse-ptp
 * eclipse-pydev
 * eclipse-remote-services-api
 * eclipse-rse
 * eclipse-subclipse
 * eclipse-wtp
 * eclipse-xsd
 * glassfish
 * jsymphonic
 * jta
 * netbeans
 * openjdk-8-jre-dcevm
 * pirl
 * pleiades
 * procyon
 * sikulix
 * triplea

Packages added to testing:

 * gradle-completion (1.3.1)
 * hibiscus (2.8.8)
 * jameica (2.8.2)
 * jaxws (2.3.0.2)
 * maven-cache-cleanup (1.0.4)
 * omegat (3.6.0.10)
 * openjdk-11 (11.0.2+9)
 * sbt-ivy (2.4.0~rc1)
 * tomcat9 (9.0.14)

Packages upgraded in testing:

 * activemq (5.15.8)
 * ant (1.10.5)
 * antlr4 (4.7.1)
 * apache-directory-server (2.0.0~M24)
 * aspectj (1.9.2)
 * bnd (3.5.0)
 * checkstyle (8.15)
 * cobertura (2.1.1)
 * cup (0.11b-20160615)
 * derby (10.14.2.0)
 * ecj (3.16.0)
 * fop (2.3)
 * freeplane (1.7.2)
 * gradle (4.4.1)
 * groovy (2.4.16)
 * hsqldb (2.4.1)
 * ivyplusplus (1.28)
 * jabref (3.8.2+ds)
 * japi-compliance-checker (2.4)
 * java-common (0.71)
 * java-wrappers (0.3)
 * jaxb (2.3.0.1)
 * jblas (1.2.4)
 * jedit (5.5.0)
 * jetty9 (9.4.14)
 * jflex (1.7.0)
 * jhove (1.20.1)
 * jruby (9.1.13.0)
 * jtreg (4.2-b13)
 * jython (2.7.1+repack1)
 * libapache-mod-jk (1.2.46)
 * maven (3.6.0)
 * nailgun (0.9.3)
 * openjdk-8 (8u171-b11)
 * openjfx (11.0.1+1)
 * pdfsam (4.0.1)
 * proguard (6.0.3)
 * robocode (1.9.3.3)
 * scala (2.11.12)
 * simplyhtml (0.17.3)
 * stegosuite (0.8.0)
 * sweethome3d (6.0)
 * sweethome3d-furniture (1.6.4)
 * sweethome3d-furniture-editor (1.23)
 * tomcat-native (1.2.19)
 * tomcat8 (8.5.37) -> will be removed before the release
 * uimaj (2.10.2)
 * visualvm (1.4.2)
 * xmlbeans (3.0.2)
 * yui-compressor (2.4.8)
 * zookeeper (3.4.13)

Total packages added to testing: 179
Total packages removed from testing: 95
Total packages updated in testing: 291
Total packages upgraded in testing: 283

Number of packages maintained: 1003



Re: FOSDEM 19 Debian Java talk

2019-02-01 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
Hi Markus,

Le 29/01/2019 à 19:00, Markus Koschany a écrit :

> I will attend FOSDEM 19 in Brussels this weekend (03.02.2019, 12:40
> local time) and give a lightning talk (15 min) about our heroics.
> 
> https://fosdem.org/2019/schedule/event/debian_java/

Thanks a lot for holding that talk. I won't be able to attend by I can
make some suggestions.


> Naturally there is not enough time to explain everything in detail but
> it should be adequate to put our message across. Here is your chance.
> What do you consider important or what would you like other people from
> the community to know?

You could maybe summarize the upcoming Java related changes in Buster. I
started thinking about a blog post on this topic, the freeze is the good
time to publish it. Some items worth mentioning:
- the transition to OpenJDK 11 and the massive effort involved (more
than 400 package updates the last time I counted)
- the state of the build tools. Ant and Maven are up to date, Gradle is
stuck at the last pre-Kotlin version. SBT still being worked on.
- the state of the JVM languages: Groovy 2.14, Scala 2.11.12 (2.12
requires SBT), Clojure 1.9. Kotlin is wanted but difficult to bootstrap.
- the state of the IDEs: Eclipse is gone (lack of maintainers), Netbeans 10
- on the application servers side: Jetty 9.4 and Tomcat 9, fully up to
date, and now with systemd integration.
- the reproducibility rate is now around 85% (Stretch was around 75%).


> I would like to reuse some of the scripts that we used for our last blog
> post in 2016 [1] to fetch some packaging statistics. Are those scripts
> still available? Otherwise I intend to use UDD a lot.

I have a script that compares the packages between two releases but I
haven't published it yet. I'll run it and post the result for the
stretch/testing differences (it doesn't addresses the maintainer/bug
counts though).


> What specific OpenJDK changes caused the most grief?

- New layout of the JDK installation
- Removal of tools.jar
- Removal of the JavaEE APIs (activation, JAXB, JAXWS...)
- Removal of javah
- javac source/target pre 1.6 removal.
- ByteBuffer return type changes (Java 11 compiled code breaks with 8)
- sun.misc.Unsafe breaking changes
- Javadoc pendantic errors, JQuery embedding

But let's not rant too much and keep the talk positive :)


> Why we all love JavaDoc? :E

Grrr :)


Emmanuel Bourg



Re: FOSDEM 19 Debian Java talk

2019-02-01 Thread Hans-Christoph Steiner



Emmanuel Bourg:
> Le 30/01/2019 à 22:59, Hans-Christoph Steiner a écrit :
> 
>> I thought it was worth a blog post too, as a follow up to your talk:
>> https://salsa.debian.org/publicity-team/bits/merge_requests/16
> 
> Nice, remember the Java Team also has its own blog [1], that might be
> nice to announce the FOSDEM talk there. It's just a matter of updating
> the blog repository [2], the update is published automatically by a
> Gitlab trigger.
> 
> 
> [1] https://java.debian.net/blog/
> [2] https://salsa.debian.org/java-team/pkg-java-blog
> 

Ok, based on the git history, it looks like posts are just pushed
directly.  So I just pushed my post there.

Based on the feedback from the publicity team, I'll wait for an update
from apo on his FOSDEM talk and include that in the post on bits.debian.org.

.hc