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

Bug#1034196: unblock: openrefine/3.6.2-2



Hi Markus,

On 20-04-2023 15:21, Markus Koschany wrote:
In version 3.5.x upstream included all Javascript files in the original source
tarball but also shipped some minified files without the unminified sources.

[...]

This was a missing piece. At least it explains how you got where you are now.

Since I already followed the Debian Policy and included the missing sources in
debian/missing-sources, I felt that shipping the 3rdparty directory in
debian/missing-sources/3rdparty would be a good intermediate solution.

But you added a more files than you have in testing (including jquery.js).

If you
insist I can repack the tarball, add the 3rdparty directory and remove it from
debian/missing-sources but in the end it would not make any difference.

Huh? I wasn't asking you to do that. I was asking you to use packaged binaries as a dependency.

Openrefine is a desktop application which only runs on your own computer.

You know, now I know. Does the security team also know? Should they really?

If
you insist I can depend on libjs-jquery and replace the local copy with a
symlink but I feel this would be an example of over-engineering without any
real value to our users in this specific case.

That argument holds for a lot of things we do. What I try to say is that there's a price we pay in our community too by not doing it. In this case: tracking embedded versions. Because of the popularity of things like jquery they are embedded a lot and we're trying to track them *and* remove them. Just to clear, I wasn't *only* talking about jquery.js, but also about the others that are covered by binaries in our archive. Even if upstream added stuff back, I would still recommend you to link (and depend on) the files shipped in e.g. libjs-jquery. I know what I talking about, my upstream cacti ships a lot of embedded libraries too; I do my best to remove things that we already ship in Debian. My upstream complained once in a while that my versions are wrong; I still believe it's the right thing to do in a distribution like Debian. I think they are starting to see the value of our side too.

Lintian is telling you that too:
https://udd.debian.org/lintian/?packages=openrefine

Paul

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: