Re: VTK 9.5.2 upload to experimental?
Hi Dominique!
Thanks a lot for proposing to work on vtk9! Really appreciated.
I agree with everything Drew said. Just two extra notes from me:
- Please think carefully if renaming the binary package really brings
any real benefit.
- Not all dependent packages have switched to Qt6 yet. Please make
sure they still build fine.
For example, yade does not support Qt6 upstream yet. I can remember
from the qt3-qt4 migration,
both versions where supported for some time.
Thanks again
Best regards
Anton
Am Di., 23. Sept. 2025 um 13:14 Uhr schrieb Drew Parsons <dparsons@emerall.com>:
>
> On 2025-09-22 23:48, Dominique Belhachemi wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Would it make sense to start the process of uploading VTK 9.5.2 to
> > experimental or is someone already working on it?
>
> Uploading to experimental is "always" safe, if no one else has already
> started it
> (I'm not actively working on it right now myself)
>
> > I have a few changes in mind
> > - Switch to Qt6
>
> Good idea to use Qt6 if it builds reliably.
>
> > - Drop the libvtk9-java package
>
> I'm neutral on this. In general it's good to support all options than
> can reasonably be built and supported. Why would you drop it?
>
> > - Drop the vtk9-doc package
>
> I'm strongly against this proposition.
> doc packages are generally useful, especially when you want to work in
> locations where internet is not available.
> Why would you drop the doc package?
>
>
> > - Rename the vtk9 binary package to vtk9-utils, or drop it as well,
> > what is it for?
>
> My general inclination is to be conservative on changing existing
> packages,
> but in this case you're right, the vtk9 binary package is a little
> pointless.
> No strong reason not to change it vtk9-utils, that package name makes
> more sense for what it provides.
>
>
> > - Drop MPI support
>
> ?? huh ?? Why would you do this? Don't do this.
>
>
> > - Finally try to link paraview against it
>
> Curious. Historically upstream showed little interest in making paraview
> work with an external VTK,
> but they appear to have started thinking about it experimentally,
> https://gitlab.kitware.com/vtk/vtk/-/merge_requests/10315
>
> https://gitlab.kitware.com/paraview/paraview/-/issues/22335#note_1434637
> Great if you can get it to work.
>
> Drew
>
Reply to: