Bug#811432: Krita no longer part of Calligra
Hi,
> My guess is that most of these bugs will fix themselves once 2.9 is
> packaged. I think there were some attempts to fix these before, but the
> package was rejected by the ftpmasters on copyright grounds - so they'll
> need to be some work to sort that out.
Yes, pretty much my philosophy. Why put time and energy into fixing something
that you plan to discard for a newer version shortly after you have fixed it.
When for all one knows, the upgraded package might auto-fix the problems you
were trying to fix.
That said, the copyright grounds don't seem too severe... I guess the file that
they object to appeared in the build before, as they do not upload a new version,
thus it must also appear in Jessie and Sid ports, and only one file that could
get downloaded seperately.
How much of a task goes into packaging something like Calligra? I see that
calligra-2.9.10 went into the debian VCS on 2015-12-31 (last entry). I have
no experience in packaging, slowly as time goes on I learn more and more about
this dark art, until I reach the point where I feel ready to take the plunge.
> However since Krita is now separate, I think it should be packaged
> separately in its own source package. Krita also forked calligra-libs so
> they'll be some code duplication, but I don't see any way around that.
> The new Krita package could then ignore the bugs that don't apply to it
> anymore.
Aye, and it allows for more streamlined development, both for us and for them.
Calligra still on 2.9, whilst Krita had landed 3.0. A shame though that they
felt they had to fork calligra-libs, I always hate code duplication. I would
have hoped that they could find a way to compromise on how they want the
library to operate.
> I was thinking about helping packaging Krita, but I haven't found the
> time as of yet.
I would consider packaging it myself, but as I say, I don't feel quite ready
to take the plunge just yet, and the time commitment puts me of a bit. I have
reached the stage where ${misc:Depends} and ${shlibs:Depends} now pique my
curiosity as that seems part of the initial problem here in this bug. That
debian autodetects the wrong library (to link against?). As far as I understand.
Jack
Reply to: