Re: getting pinta updated in Debian
Hello Mike,
I have some experience with Mono packaging in Fedora.
I know of the dotnet SIG in Fedora. They made a massive effort,
involving Microsoft employees, to get dotnet core built according to the
Fedora rules (build from source, not using external files, etc).
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/DotNet
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DotNet
You can find the spec files here:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dotnet6.0/tree/rawhide
I don't know enough about Debian packaging so I don't know if that is of
any help.
Pinta has not been updated to version 2.0.2 for Fedora yet, see this
discussion:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/dotnet-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/2W7DBQ6E5FXSHVMKG7SUT4YZAYPXZUEC/
It is really difficult to package dotnet packages, because of all the
nuget dependancies. We have not figured that out for Fedora. Or did not
have the volunteers yet to do that.
Alternatives to dotnet: Mono, dotgnu
https://www.gnu.org/software/dotgnu/
"As of December 2012, the DotGNU project has been decommissioned."
Mono: it is the alternative to .NET Framework, which Microsoft will
support for many years to come. But the new stuff is happening in
dotnet, so projects like Pinta are moving from Mono to dotnet.
I hope this helps,
Timotheus
I am currently looking into requirements of getting pinta in Debian
updated to the latest upstream version.
My problem: I am not at all a .NET developer or maintainer, so this is a
piece of work with a steep learning curve for me.
What I found now are AUR packages for pinta (and its dependency
dotnet-runtime) that are quite up-to-date:
https://archlinux.org/packages/community/any/pinta/
https://archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/dotnet-core/
It basically looks like we need to get dotnet-core into Debian and then
update pinta to latest 2.0.2 upstream release and we are done.
However, dotnet-core seems to be massive and I wonder if that can be
avoided as its API is provided by something else in Debian. I am asking
this possibly stupid question because I am astounded that noone has ever
packaged dotnet-core, filed an RFP or ITP for it, etc.
Furthermore, it seems that dotnet-core has been licensed under a
DFSG-compliant MIT license variant [1].
Do I miss anything here? Is there a hidden blocker? Or is it just that
noone has been interested in dotnet-core (and/or a pinta version bump),
so far / recently?
Thanks for feedback!
Mike
[1] https://github.com/dotnet/core/blob/main/LICENSE.TXT
Reply to: