On 12/16/2017 04:39 PM, Markus Koschany wrote: > Am 16.12.2017 um 15:52 schrieb Sebastiaan Couwenberg: >> On 12/16/2017 03:43 PM, Markus Koschany wrote: >>> Am 16.12.2017 um 14:03 schrieb Sebastiaan Couwenberg: >>> [...] >>>> Thanks for the feedback. Unfortunately I still cannot get the build to work. >>>> >>>> I'm giving up on this package, and request the Debian Java Maintainers >>>> to take over its maintenance since all reverse dependencies are >>>> maintained within the Java team as well. >>> >>> Did you receive my email? I think that would have been the way forward >>> in your case. >> >> I read your mail, as I'm subscribed to this list. >> >> But I don't consider build depending on oneself an acceptable solution. > > Ok, then what would you consider an acceptable solution because I don't > see a better one for libsejda-java? I could also introduce a second > libsejda-java source package and build-depend on that but is this really > better? Also it works is not just some theory. That is up to the maintainers of libsejda-java. My concern is with the jts package. > I would like to point out that it is rather unlikely that someone will > adopt jts. We should either strive to improve our documentation and > tools or reduce the number of packages because the status quo is not > sustainable in the long-run. Then I'll orphan it, and there'll be an unmaintained package in the in the dependency tree for elasticsearch, h2database, spatial4j & spatial4j-0.4. I'd rather remove the jts package from Debian, but it's not appropriate for me to request the removal of its reverse dependencies for which I'm not the maintainer. Kind Regards, Bas -- GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1 Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146 50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature