On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 01:01:43AM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > On Sat, Sep 19, 2020 at 11:34 PM tony mancill <tmancill@debian.org> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 12:40:44PM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > > > While working on #943552 I faced few problems with manifest files and > > > as a result I am unable to list them in the bundles.info file. > > > > > > <--snip--> > > > > > > If no-one has any problem with my suggested changes then I can go > > > ahead and team-upload them. All the changes are only in the > > > MANIFEST.MF and nothing in the code. > > > > Hi Sudip, > > > > Sounds reasonable to me. > > Thanks Tony. And, I have a doubt about another package, maybe you can > tell me about it. I noticed that there was a "lucene" which was > removed when "lucene2" was introduced, then that was removed and > "lucene4.10" package was added. Now, I am looking at upstream v8.6.2, > so I need to package it as "lucene8" ? And I am mostly puzzled about > why instead of updating the original "lucene" source package, separate > source was packaged for each version? for transition? Hi Sudip, Good question. I don't think it is for transition but probably because lucene3 and lucene4 aren't API-compatible and we weren't able to port the packages that depend on them. (Although I don't recall specifically and haven't checked.) You can use japi-compliance-checker or clirr to assess compatibility between lucene4.10 and version 8. Maybe we can port forward this time around. But I am not familiar with lucene, so maybe it's easier to introduce a new lucene8 source package. $ reverse-depends -b liblucene4.10-java Reverse-Build-Depends * derby * h2database * openjfx * scilab $ reverse-depends -b liblucene3-java Reverse-Build-Depends * netbeans * omegat Cheers, tony
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature