Re: RFS: poco (updated package)
Patrick Roland Gansterer writes:
> Dear mentors,
Hi,
(I'm the usual sponsor of poco and poco-doc, and I'm looking for co-
sponsors;-)
Some preliminary comments follow:
> I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.3.6-1
> of package "poco" and "poco-doc".
>
> It builds these binary packages:
> libpoco-dev - Development files for POCO - The C++ Portable Components
> libpococrypto9 - The C++ Portable Components Crypto library
> libpococrypto9-dbg - The C++ Portable Components Crypto library, debug
> version libpocodata9 - The C++ Portable Components Data library
> libpocodata9-dbg - The C++ Portable Components Data library, debug version
> libpocofoundation9 - The C++ Portable Components Foundation library
> libpocofoundation9-dbg - The C++ Portable Components Foundation library,
> debug version
> libpocomysql9 - The C++ Portable Components MySQL library
> libpocomysql9-dbg - The C++ Portable Components MySQL library, debug
> version libpoconet9 - The C++ Portable Components Network library
> libpoconet9-dbg - The C++ Portable Components Network library, debug
> version libpoconetssl9 - The C++ Portable Components Network library with
> SSL libpoconetssl9-dbg - The C++ Portable Components Network library with
> SSL, dbg version
> libpocoodbc9 - The C++ Portable Components ODBC library
> libpocoodbc9-dbg - The C++ Portable Components ODBC library, debug version
> libpocosqlite9 - The C++ Portable Components SQLite library
> libpocosqlite9-dbg - The C++ Portable Components SQLite library, debug
> version libpocoutil9 - The C++ Portable Components Util library
> libpocoutil9-dbg - The C++ Portable Components Util library, debug version
> libpocoxml9 - The C++ Portable Components XML library
> libpocoxml9-dbg - The C++ Portable Components XML library, debug version
> libpocozip9 - The C++ Portable Components Zip library
> libpocozip9-dbg - The C++ Portable Components Zip library, debug version
>
> The upload would fix these bugs: 545854, 548113, 560936
I'll have a look at these these days. However, clamfs package would require a
rebuild, at least, so maintainer CC'ed (who is also a co-maintainer of poco).
As a side note: poco is still breaking the binary compatibility with each new
upstream release. I understand that while a library is still young and
evolving that could be really needed sometimes to properly fix improper design
decisions being made in the past. However, poco seems to be well established
already, and I imagine it would follow the 'good library management' practices
for instance as described in dpkg-gensymbols(1) under the section of 'Good
library management'. Otherwise, we lose one of the key features of libraries,
adherence to the interface contract it already published, which just makes the
thing harder to reuse. Yes, I know boost is in the same boat, but at least
they claim they are researching, and don't care too much for practical
consequences which arise with distributing the product. So, the main question
being: poco is going to perform good library management in the future, or they
are going to be like boost camp? With poco we are lucky that we don't have so
many packages to depends on it, however that might change in the future, and
we certainly face a trouble with it.
> The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
> - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/poco
> - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main
> contrib non-free
> - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/poco/poco_1.3.6-1.dsc
>
> I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.
I'll take care.
--
pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu>
Reply to: