Re: Merging GRASS upstream packaging with DebianGIS
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 29.07.2015 15:14, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> Hi Ivan,
>
> On 29-07-15 14:48, Ivan Mincik wrote:
>> instead of pushing my work, I have decided to give up.
>
> I'm a little sad to hear that. Is there no way we can help you?
>
>> The initial goal was to have GRASS packaging for upstream daily
>> builds (using Launchpad) which will be hosted on Alioth (as
>> package grass-daily) which will be regularly synced with Debian
>> packaging. I have started with fork of current 'experimental'
>> branch, renamed package 'grass' to 'grass-daily'.
>
>> After spending last night with trying to fine tune 'grass-daily'
>> package to be able to coexist with stable 'grass' package, I
>> have realized, that number of changes required to get it working
>> is so huge, that it will be a problem to keep it in sync with
>> Debian packaging, which was the initial goal.
>
> What are the many changes required?
>
> The biggest difference between the Debian packages and the
> upstream GRASS packages are the package names. Updating the
> packaging to use the GRASS names only takes a couple of search &
> replace commands.
Yes, this is what I did, than I have removed liblas support because of
dependency in experimental.
> The Debian packages also conflict with the upstream grass packages
> for the same version, if need to remove those
> Conflicts/Provides/Replaces in the upstream GRASS packaging. I've
> added those to the Debian packaging to make sure the official
> Debian packages are always installed in favor of the unofficial
> upstream GRASS packages, and that trying to have both installed
> doesn't end in a dependency conflict.
I have also removed those Conflicts/Provides/Replaces.
>> Now, I am changing my mind and I think, the best way would be to
>> build daily packages in separate 'ppa' repository (grass-devel)
>> [1] without renaming them with '-daily' or '7' sufix. We will
>> loose possibility to install 'stable', 'daily' and 'grass 6'
>> together, but by my opinion, it wasn't properly working either
>> now. On the other way, GRASS upstream could follow and contribute
>> packaging on Alioth without any major problems.
>
>> @Martin, what do you think about it ?
>
>> @Sebastiaan, thank you very much for your help.
>
> I'd like to raise a question. If we cannot make the official
> Debian and upstream GRASS packaging co-exist in the same VCS, how
> can we make the resulting packages co-exist in Debian and Ubuntu
> via PPA?
>
> The co-existance of the official Debian packages and the upstream
> GRASS packages is a problem I'd like to solve. Having the packaging
> in the same VCS was a nice start.
Sorry, maybe you didn't understand me correctly. I also definitely
want GRASS upstream packaging in Alioth, but I doubt if it is worth of
effort to support installation of daily builds together with stable
release in one system. When I have tested my 'grass-daily' package
with stable 'grass', I have realized that, more customization must be
done than those above.
Now I think, that the best option would be to have only one 'grass'
package and user will choose which version to install - stable or
daily build. No parallel installations. All builds will be done from
DebianGIS packaging on Alioth. That's all.
- --
Ivan Minčík
ivan.mincik@gmail.com GPG: 0x79529A1E
http://imincik.github.io/0x79529A1E.key
ivan.mincik@gista.sk GPG: 0xD714B02C
http://imincik.github.io/0xD714B02C.key
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVuNgiAAoJEPfdLsR5UpoepWQH/1Fx/UVNBYWBWQ83gRRyn3Ge
/uQhG10X8cgI1lsjOfGauUjUnDj8RulrjByB8XKjitUYRAd4D0hM4HHotTujUB66
mb2LspCHRpKpp7+vUKfgpQq6onWaYXBMds//HTn+ZPjX7D0LTQoj8DUpDPUjGRBt
WCrbA3+iWZakMviAJYdPH1Ci+9u5mAzxGMdXb3Rca/T18A+jqChTKYKMV/ddTwMh
O1CajBMssRU0tqcfhnZyDBY6T2Ezc0Bqm15yU/E+jxC2aK4jp7Rf5EAQdh2YUHcp
1wPfpDr4TN67sjHMXa7SOxtmdY1h+DB4UyFe4wyEyXL8ROfAwRudTdWIU2QikRY=
=cMc9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: