On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Esteve Fernandez <[email protected]>wrote:

> On Tuesday 05 May 2009 19:12:05 Michael Greene wrote:
> > I would also like this, although I'm not sure it's necessary for 0.1.
> > As long as the tarball is correct for 0.1, I would think we could
> > still package it for the various distributions after-the-fact.
>
> We don't need to merge it for 0.1, as you said, we could simply generate
> packages for Thrift after we roll 0.1
>
> > I'm not sure if the differences between Esteve and Todd's work have
> > been resolved, but there's also Eric Evans's recent work:
> > http://git.debian.org/?p=users/eevans/thrift.git;a=summary
> >
> > Esteve, Todd, and Eric: can you comment on the state of your packaging
> > and whether the differences between your packages can be merged or
> > otherwise resolved?
>
> Which is the best packaging? Mine, of course! :-)
>

My work and Esteve's are pretty much merged at this point. I made a couple
of changes last week after we ivy-ified the Java lib, which I'll post to the
JIRA momentarily.


>
> Not really, but it's already being used by some people and it's been "in
> the
> wild" for a while. I feel a bit uneasy having two separate efforts,
> especially given that upstream (i.e. us) has been working on it for a while
> (THRIFT-71 was filed in July the 9th), THRIFT-71 already has support for
> C++,
> Java, Ruby, Perl, Python, C# and Erlang, and works with Ubuntu Hardy and
> Debian Lenny.
>

My other difference is that I've disabled the C# builds in order to
successfully build on Debian Etch, which was a requirement for my packages.

-Todd

Reply via email to