On 09/02/2011 12:25, Stefane Fermigier wrote:
My apt-get source, hack and dpkg-bp was seen from a derivative
developer or sysadmin that has to modify the way a software works
on its own system or distribution.
As a sysadmin, I've never found the need to repackage a package.
If I need to
On 09/02/2011 15:40, Stefane Fermigier wrote:
I'm also trying to pass a message: you obviously care about packaging
Java applications, so aren't you frustrated that this is so hard (I
mean, impossible) to do for any significant and useful business
application (those that professional Debian
On Feb 10, 2011, at 10:57 AM, Giovanni Mascellani wrote:
On 09/02/2011 15:40, Stefane Fermigier wrote:
I'm also trying to pass a message: you obviously care about packaging
Java applications, so aren't you frustrated that this is so hard (I
mean, impossible) to do for any significant and
On Feb 10, 2011, at 10:51 AM, Giovanni Mascellani wrote:
On 09/02/2011 12:25, Stefane Fermigier wrote:
2. sometimes the policies need to be changed in the face of reality.
Otherwise, we end up like these poor monkeys:
Hello,
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Stefane Fermigier s...@nuxeo.com wrote:
On Feb 10, 2011, at 10:51 AM, Giovanni Mascellani wrote:
On 09/02/2011 12:25, Stefane Fermigier wrote:
[...]
Could we please end this thread here ? I'm glad it turned into a
constructive discussion on a
On Feb 10, 2011, at 11:29 AM, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
Hello,
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Stefane Fermigier s...@nuxeo.com wrote:
On Feb 10, 2011, at 10:51 AM, Giovanni Mascellani wrote:
On 09/02/2011 12:25, Stefane Fermigier wrote:
[...]
Could we please end this thread here ?
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Stefane Fermigier s...@nuxeo.com wrote:
Problem is, this is a policy issue, that is specific from the Java world
The issues Debian faces in packaging Java stuff is definitely not
specific to the Java world. Ruby, C, Python, games, all of them have
had or still
Stefane Fermigier s...@nuxeo.com writes:
I'm talking about the facts that valuable packages are not available *at
all* for us Debian / Ubuntu users.
In the case being discussed here, they're available from your separate apt
repository. If you were running Fedora, getting things from
On Feb 9, 2011, at 8:40 AM, Giovanni Mascellani wrote:
On 09/02/2011 06:12, tony mancill wrote:
etc. So it seems either that nobody cares about getting these fine
(and popular) applications into Debian, or it's just too hard to do
given the current set of policies.
I think this is a fair
Hi.
On 09/02/2011 10:06, Stefane Fermigier wrote:
I'd say that this one of the main added value of a distribution:
many different pieces of software harmonized together, under a
consistent policy so that people that want to change something in
the source code and recompile just have to do
On Feb 9, 2011, at 10:45 AM, Giovanni Mascellani wrote:
Hi.
On 09/02/2011 10:06, Stefane Fermigier wrote:
I'd say that this one of the main added value of a distribution:
many different pieces of software harmonized together, under a
consistent policy so that people that want to change
On 09/02/2011 14:50, Scott Howard wrote:
BTW, here's what geogebra's download page
(http://www.geogebra.org/cms/en/download) says: You are free to
copy, distribute and transmit GeoGebra for non-commercial
purposes.
Isn't this a flagrant violation of the DFSG (Item 6, No
Discrimination
Hi,
Am 09.02.2011 15:24, schrieb Vincent Fourmond:
The FTPmaster will *never* accept sourceless JARs.
we don't accept them into Debian's main component. However they are
acceptable for the non-free component as long as it is allowed to
redistribute them in binary form.
Cheers,
Torsten
--
Thanks, Torsten, this is great news !
Can we start this discussion over with this option in mind ?
S.
On Feb 9, 2011, at 3:49 PM, Torsten Werner wrote:
Hi,
Am 09.02.2011 15:24, schrieb Vincent Fourmond:
The FTPmaster will *never* accept sourceless JARs.
we don't accept them into
Am 09.02.2011 15:51, schrieb Stefane Fermigier:
Can we start this discussion over with this option in mind ?
There is another option that we should discuss:
- distribute all those binary dependencies in a separate package, e.g.
nuxeo-nonfree-libs via alioth.d.o or some other inofficial server
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Torsten Werner twer...@debian.org wrote:
Am 09.02.2011 15:24, schrieb Vincent Fourmond:
The FTPmaster will *never* accept sourceless JARs.
we don't accept them into Debian's main component. However they are
acceptable for the non-free component as long as it
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Torsten Werner twer...@debian.org wrote:
Am 09.02.2011 15:51, schrieb Stefane Fermigier:
Can we start this discussion over with this option in mind ?
There is another option that we should discuss:
- distribute all those binary dependencies in a separate
On Feb 9, 2011, at 4:02 PM, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Torsten Werner twer...@debian.org wrote:
Am 09.02.2011 15:24, schrieb Vincent Fourmond:
The FTPmaster will *never* accept sourceless JARs.
we don't accept them into Debian's main component. However they
Bonjour Stéphane,
Le mercredi 09 février 2011 à 16:36 +0100, Stefane Fermigier a écrit :
On Feb 9, 2011, at 4:02 PM, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Torsten Werner twer...@debian.org wrote:
Am 09.02.2011 15:24, schrieb Vincent Fourmond:
The FTPmaster will
Am 09.02.2011 16:43, schrieb Sylvestre Ledru:
If the upstream of a library is regularly breaking the ABI (which is not
uncommon), I will add a check in the build system to make sure that I
will find the exact version of the upstream library I am using (it does
help also other distributions).
Hello,
I'm a maintainer of Nuxeo distributions.
We want to give Debian users an easy access to our open source (LGPL) products.
That means being able to publish Debian
packages into on of your repositories.
As far as I understand the case, the issue lies into the gap between two build
and
Hi Julian,
Others have covered the constraints for getting your package into
Debian. There is one possible alternative you might consider if the work
to package into Debian is too time consuming. You could publish your own
apt repository containing your package. This would require users to add
On Feb 8, 2011, at 8:14 PM, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
My point is not to discourage you or express scorn or whichever
negative view on Nuxeo, but just to state the sine qua none conditions
for a package to enter Debian.
Out of curiosity, how many large Java application are currently packaged
On Feb 8, 2011, at 8:25 PM, Andrew Ross wrote:
Hi Julian,
Others have covered the constraints for getting your package into
Debian. There is one possible alternative you might consider if the work
to package into Debian is too time consuming. You could publish your own
apt repository
Bonjour Stéfane :)
Le mardi 08 février 2011 20:46:27, Stefane Fermigier a écrit :
On Feb 8, 2011, at 8:14 PM, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
My point is not to discourage you or express scorn or whichever
negative view on Nuxeo, but just to state the sine qua none conditions
for a package to
tony mancill tmanc...@debian.org writes:
What I hope to see happen is that Debian will continue to package more
and more of the popular Java libraries needed for these applications and
frameworks, to the point where Debian becomes a development platform of
choice because (a) it's less work to
On Feb 7, 2011, at 9:10 AM, Thomas Koch wrote:
Stefane Fermigier:
On Feb 6, 2011, at 10:29 PM, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
JARs in a source package. We absolutely need every single package
compiled from source, and that includes their dependencies. That's why
packaging Java applications for
Hi,
Am 07.02.2011 09:42, schrieb Stefane Fermigier:
So I guess in this case the root of all evil (like often in the Java world)
comes from Maven...
primarily from the (central) Maven repository which is not well
maintained. The software Maven is not evil but it has some issues, too.
Cheers,
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Stefane Fermigier s...@nuxeo.com wrote:
So I guess in this case the root of all evil (like often in the Java world)
comes from Maven...
I think the main problem is the easy management of versioned
depencencies. Software that allow the easy coexistence of a
Hi,
I'm new to this list, and I've joined specifically in the hope of finding a way
to work with you guys in order to get our open source ECM software (Nuxeo CAP,
DM, DAM, etc.), which are Java EE applications, into Debian.
I'm already in touch with the Ubuntu guys, and I've tried to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 2011-02-06 20:24, Stefane Fermigier wrote:
Hi,
I'm new to this list, and I've joined specifically in the hope of finding a
way to work with you guys in order to get our open source ECM software (Nuxeo
CAP, DM, DAM, etc.), which are Java
On Feb 6, 2011, at 10:15 PM, Niels Thykier wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 2011-02-06 20:24, Stefane Fermigier wrote:
We are fully aware that our packages are not built in a way similar to the
way a Linux package is usually built (i.e.: ./configure ; make ; make
On Feb 6, 2011, at 10:29 PM, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 10:15 PM, Niels Thykier ni...@thykier.net wrote:
Here are the main objection that have been raised (by some Ubuntu guys)
about the way we are making our packages:
1. It looks like they're bundling their own
33 matches
Mail list logo
