Bug#901015: transition: protobuf
[Removed the Security Team Cc, they were relevant for backporting
protobuf to Stretch, not for updating it in Sid.]
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 10:14 AM Pirate Praveen
<praveen@onenetbeyond.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jul 2018 10:55:03 +0200
> =?UTF-8?B?TMOhc3psw7MgQsO2c3rDtnJtw6lueWkgKEdDUyk=?= <gcs@debian.org> wrote:
> > The most problematic point is the protobuf-c dependency package. It
> > was developed (and packaged) by one of us (an other DD), Robert S.
> > Edmonds. It is the most complete C language implementation of Protocol
> > Buffers. While it has a newer upstream release in Git than the
> > packaged version, it's still not compatible with protobuf 3.6.0.1
> > which is in experimental.
[...]
> What do you think about providing protobuf3.0 in parallel to updating
> protobuf to 3.6? That way we can move ahead with gitlab and provide more
> time for either updating protobuf-c or porting packages to protobluff.
> We can drop protobuf3.0 when protobuf-c issue is resolved.
Actually I would like to investigate every possibility.
1) Check the list of protobuf-c main contributors[1] if any of them
can / want to continue its development.
2) Try to update protobuf-c for version 3.6 of protobuf, but I can't
be its upstream developer on the long run.
3) Patch protobuf-c to use the implementation of scoped_array in Boost.
4) At least check the required porting needs of dependencies to
protobluff. Ask their maintainers if they want / can do the porting.
Maybe they know other alternatives.
If these fail and RMs ACK to carry two versions of protobuf then of
course, do it. Emilio?
How quick do you need to solve this GitLab update? I guess, quick.
Cheers,
Laszlo/GCS
[1] https://github.com/protobuf-c/protobuf-c/graphs/contributors
Reply to: