Re: RFS: cdk 1.2.7-1
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Onkar Shinde <onkarshinde@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Egon Willighagen
> <egon.willighagen@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Can you please file patch 21 and 22 'upstream'? Preferably as Git
>> patches, but the raw Debian patches are fine with me too:
>>
>> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=20024&atid=320024
>>
>> If non-git patches, is the name and email you sent this message with
>> OK for me to use as 'author' info, when I apply the patches? (Though I
>> will need to check them first...)
>
> All changes in these patches may not be applicable to upstream. I will
> check which ones are applicable and send patches accordingly.
That I can decide on when you uploaded them... Some patches may be
done differently... e.g. for Debian I had set up a scheme that takes
care of different jar names, which would make the patch much
smaller...
What I am rather trying to say, is that the patch indicates a
deficiency in the build system, and I am eager to make the build
system is good as possible, so that your work involves as minimal as
patching as possible...
The vecmath patch is an interesting example, and could simply be
solved upstream by renaming the jar according to Debian guidelines.
The same for log4j and xom, but I note that with log4j you are
actually *adding* the version number, rather than removing it.
Egon
--
Dr E.L. Willighagen
Postdoctoral Researcher
Institutet för miljömedicin
Karolinska Institutet (http://ki.se/imm)
Homepage: http://egonw.github.com/
LinkedIn: http://se.linkedin.com/in/egonw
Blog: http://chem-bla-ics.blogspot.com/
PubList: http://www.citeulike.org/user/egonw/tag/papers
Reply to: