[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Looking for advice about json-simple 3 transition



Hello,

On 2020-05-13 16:46, Gilles Filippini wrote:
I'd like to push json-simple 3.1.1 into unstable, but I'm not sure how I
should handle the transition. The 3.x releases are not backward
compatible with 2.x.

A whole set of deprecated classes has been removed:
* Deprecated JSONParse and JSONValue in favor of Jsoner.
* Deprecated JSONStreamAware and JSONAware in favor of Jsonable.
* Deprecated JSONObject in favor of JsonObject.
* Deprecated JSONArray in favor of JsonArray.

Maybe it wouldn't be too difficult to patch the dependencies to work with 3.x release? There are ~15 source packages, so I'd say it should be doable provided the API changes are not too drastic. This would allow to retain the same binary package name.

I think about renaming the binary package to libjson-simple1-java but
keeping the jar file name as json-simple.jar. It implies setting
Conflicts: libjson-simple-java.

Name libjson-simple3-java would be better, as it reflects the upstream version. However, I would recommend against having conflicting JAR names, as this would effectively forbid coexistence of packages depending on different versions of json-simple.

If having both v2 and v3 JARs could not be avoided, I'd suggest providing /usr/share/java/json-simple-2.x.jar in libjson-simple-java and /usr/share/java/json-simple-3.x.jar in libjson-simple3-java. Packages junit [1] and junit4 [2] are made to coexist in a similar manner.

[1] https://packages.debian.org/sid/all/junit/filelist
[2] https://packages.debian.org/sid/all/junit4/filelist

Hope this helps,
Andrius

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: