Re: cmdliner 1.0.0 uses topkg for building

2017-07-20 Thread Stéphane Glondu
On 18/07/2017 15:11, Daniel Bünzli wrote: As for automation, it remains to be seen whether we want to map 1 opam package to 1 Debian package, or to map 1 git repo containing many opam packages to 1 Debian package. The downside of the first approach is similar to the above points. Also the

Re: cmdliner 1.0.0 uses topkg for building

2017-07-19 Thread Hendrik Tews
Daniel Bünzli writes: >> I thought topkg-care is needed to run the tests, for instance, >> for cmdliner?  > > In fact no, the `topkg` tool is really just a convenience as far as OK, I'll keep this in mind and will have a closer look when I look at the tests.

Re: cmdliner 1.0.0 uses topkg for building

2017-07-19 Thread Daniel Bünzli
On 18 July 2017 at 23:16:03, Hendrik Tews (hend...@askra.de) wrote: > Everybody, > > I am a bit shocked that my simple question about how to best > package topkg and topkg-care lead to such a heated and quite > personal discussion. I would rather prefer to have a friendly and > constructive

Re: cmdliner 1.0.0 uses topkg for building

2017-07-18 Thread Hendrik Tews
Everybody, I am a bit shocked that my simple question about how to best package topkg and topkg-care lead to such a heated and quite personal discussion. I would rather prefer to have a friendly and constructive relation to our upstream providers and to base discussions on technical arguments.

Re: cmdliner 1.0.0 uses topkg for building

2017-07-18 Thread Daniel Bünzli
On 18 July 2017 at 14:09:36, Ximin Luo (infini...@debian.org) wrote: > In Debian they have to go in two separate source packages, because the > distributed nature > of package building means (if it were in a single source package) we can't > run the build > for topkg, run the build for

Re: cmdliner 1.0.0 uses topkg for building

2017-07-18 Thread Ximin Luo
Daniel Bünzli: > On 18 July 2017 at 10:42:51, Hendrik Tews (hend...@askra.de) wrote: > >> Preparing Debian packages would of course be much more straightforward, if >> topkg and >> topkg-care would not share the same source tarball ;-) > > I am a bit curious on why this is the case exactly.

Re: cmdliner 1.0.0 uses topkg for building

2017-07-18 Thread Daniel Bünzli
On 18 July 2017 at 10:42:51, Hendrik Tews (hend...@askra.de) wrote: > Preparing Debian packages would of course be much more straightforward, if > topkg and > topkg-care would not share the same source tarball ;-) I am a bit curious on why this is the case exactly. What kind of difficulties

Re: cmdliner 1.0.0 uses topkg for building

2017-07-18 Thread Hendrik Tews
Daniel Bünzli writes: > Please note that there is no circular dependency. There are two > different opam packages: topkg and topkg-care with different build > instructions and each package should be built on its own, as done in > opam. See the topkg.opam and

Re: Re: cmdliner 1.0.0 uses topkg for building

2017-07-17 Thread Daniel Bünzli
Hello Hendrik,  Please note that there is no circular dependency. There are two different opam packages: topkg and topkg-care with different build instructions and each package should be built on its own, as done in opam. See the topkg.opam and topkg-care.opam files for a precise definition of

Re: cmdliner 1.0.0 uses topkg for building

2017-07-17 Thread Ximin Luo
Hendrik Tews: > >>> I just see: topkg depends on Fmt, Logs, Bos, Cmdliner and >>> opam-format. Out of this only cmlliner is currently in Debian, >>> right? > > There is some kind of circular build dependency: > > - topkg contains the topkg library and the topkg-care tool > - building the topkg

Re: cmdliner 1.0.0 uses topkg for building

2017-07-17 Thread Hendrik Tews
>> I just see: topkg depends on Fmt, Logs, Bos, Cmdliner and >> opam-format. Out of this only cmlliner is currently in Debian, >> right? There is some kind of circular build dependency: - topkg contains the topkg library and the topkg-care tool - building the topkg library requires nothing -

Re: cmdliner 1.0.0 uses topkg for building

2017-07-17 Thread Ximin Luo
Stéphane Glondu: > On 16/07/2017 22:15, Hendrik Tews wrote: IMO, a proper solution would require packaging topkg and, in the long run, also odig. What do you think? >>> >>> I agree. Feel free to do it! I'm not planning to do it right now, unless >>> it is absolutely necessary for the

Re: cmdliner 1.0.0 uses topkg for building

2017-07-17 Thread Stéphane Glondu
On 16/07/2017 22:15, Hendrik Tews wrote: IMO, a proper solution would require packaging topkg and, in the long run, also odig. What do you think? I agree. Feel free to do it! I'm not planning to do it right now, unless it is absolutely necessary for the transition. I just see: topkg depends

Re: cmdliner 1.0.0 uses topkg for building

2017-07-16 Thread Hendrik Tews
Stéphane Glondu writes: >> IMO, a proper solution would require packaging topkg and, in the >> long run, also odig. What do you think? > > I agree. Feel free to do it! I'm not planning to do it right now, unless > it is absolutely necessary for the transition. I just see:

Re: cmdliner 1.0.0 uses topkg for building

2017-07-16 Thread Hendrik Tews
>> IMO, a proper solution would require packaging topkg and, in the >> long run, also odig. What do you think? > > I agree. Feel free to do it! I'm not planning to do it right now, unless > it is absolutely necessary for the transition. OK, unless you have another suggestion how I could

Re: cmdliner 1.0.0 uses topkg for building

2017-07-15 Thread Stéphane Glondu
On 15/07/2017 22:17, Hendrik Tews wrote: > I looked into updating the cmdliner package for the new upstream > version 1.0.0. This new version uses topkg > (http://erratique.ch/software/topkg) for building and it seems > that the documentation is generated with odig >