Bug#912889: tinyca: Depends on libgtk2-perl, that won't be part of Bullseye
It appears that porting TinyCA to Gtk3 is doable and I have a working version. Before publishing the code on Salsa I'd like to clean it up a bit, though. I hope to get that done in the next week.
Bug#912889: tinyca: Depends on libgtk2-perl, that won't be part of Bullseye
Hi Uli! Uli Scholler (2020-09-01): > When I received your initial bug report, I followed the advice given in > Perl's Gtk3 module documentation to "run s/Gtk2/Gtk3/ on [the] > application." Unfortunately, that didn't work at all and I put it aside. Yeah, a mere s/Gtk2/Gtk3/ suffices only for very simple apps: there were incompatible API changes, and as soon as you use anything that comes from another namespace (e.g. Gdk) more porting work is needed. Thankfully that porting work is rather straightforward in most cases :) > However, encouraged by your remark that, according to popcon, there > seems to be some interest in TinyCA still, I took another shot and made > some progress towards a Gtk3 port. In light of this, let me get back to > this bug report in about two weeks and decide how to proceed. Amazing! I wish you success in this endeavor. If you hit big blockers, the upstream gtk-perl mailing list is often very helpful: its archives have answers to many questions in this area, and if not, feel free to ask :) > BTW, I keep the most up-to-date copy of the TinyCA source on Salsa > (https://salsa.debian.org/cpt_nemo-guest/tinyca). This is helpful, thank you.
Bug#912889: tinyca: Depends on libgtk2-perl, that won't be part of Bullseye
Hi, intrigeri writes: >> I hope that upstream will port the code to GTK 3 in time for the >> Bullseye freeze :) When I received your initial bug report, I followed the advice given in Perl's Gtk3 module documentation to "run s/Gtk2/Gtk3/ on [the] application." Unfortunately, that didn't work at all and I put it aside. > What do you think we should do? I can think of several options, > from the least drastic to the most: > > - File a Request For Help (RFH) bug against wnpp, in order to alert >users and fellow Debian people about the current situation. > >popcon suggests this package is still quite popular, so I have some >hope someone could volunteer :) > > - Orphan the package. > > - Remove the package from sid. With the experience of my first attempt to port TinyCA from Gtk2 to Gtk3 I was considering removing the package from Debian altogether. However, encouraged by your remark that, according to popcon, there seems to be some interest in TinyCA still, I took another shot and made some progress towards a Gtk3 port. In light of this, let me get back to this bug report in about two weeks and decide how to proceed. BTW, I keep the most up-to-date copy of the TinyCA source on Salsa (https://salsa.debian.org/cpt_nemo-guest/tinyca). Regards Uli
Bug#912889: tinyca: Depends on libgtk2-perl, that won't be part of Bullseye
Hi! intrigeri (2019-07-16): > as announced on this bug report and on debian-devel@ in November 2018, > GTK 2 is going away in Bullseye, so I'm hereby bumping severity of > these bugs, on every reverse-dependency of libgtk2-perl, to RC. > > I hope that upstream will port the code to GTK 3 in time for the > Bullseye freeze :) A year after this package was removed from testing, I'm wondering what's the best course of action for the next steps. I see that: - The last upstream release dates back to 2006, although Axel Beckert reported on #782341 that a newer version was floating around on the web, although it might be a third-party CVS snapshot not sanctioned by the upstream maintainer. - The last upload to Debian happened in 2015. - The Homepage control field points to Alioth, which was decommissioned a while ago. - In the BTS, there are a bunch of patches submitted years ago. All this suggests to me that you lack interest and/or capacity to maintain this package. That's perfectly OK: life and priorities shifts do happen :) What do you think we should do? I can think of several options, from the least drastic to the most: - File a Request For Help (RFH) bug against wnpp, in order to alert users and fellow Debian people about the current situation. popcon suggests this package is still quite popular, so I have some hope someone could volunteer :) - Orphan the package. - Remove the package from sid. What do you think? Cheers!
Bug#912889: tinyca: Depends on libgtk2-perl, that won't be part of Bullseye
Source: tinyca Severity: normal User: debian-p...@lists.debian.org Usertags: gtk2-removal Hi! This package depends on libgtk2-perl, that I intend to remove from testing soon after the Buster release, and then from sid at some later point during the Bullseye development cycle: https://bugs.debian.org/912860 Please get in touch with the upstream project and suggest they port this application to libgtk3-perl. I've personally ported a couple Perl GTK+ apps from 2.x to 3.x and it's rather straightforward. Upstream for the GTK+ 3 and GObject Introspection Perl bindings is responsive and happy to add missing bits to the bindings. Cheers! -- intrigeri
