Dear Boyuan, On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 08:48:15AM +0800, Boyuan Yang wrote: > > - status of lemon parser currently unclear > > This is fixed in the RFS of qevercloud before already. Of course we are > using the lemon parser from Debian. The bundled source code of lemon > is discarded in the source package. Sorry I didn't update the situation > on that Github thread, which is a little bit outdated.
Great. > You suggested the separate packaging of qevercloudgenerator, but now we > seems to agree that since it is not useful for anything other than building > qevercloud, it should not be packaged separately. Right. > Now the problem is focused on the separation of evernote-thrift files. > > I believe you suggested packaging thrift files alone, since the > separated package > can be used by other packages (most likely as a Build-Depend?), and to deal > with the FTBFS of qevercloud after the version bump of evernote-thrift, we can > include multiple copies. Did you suggest the coexistence of multiple versions > of evernote-thrift in the Debian repository, for example, > "evernote-thrift-1-25" and > "evernote-thrift-1-28"? Or if I misunderstood, it is just one package > "evernote-thrift" > but provides different versions of files inside one binary package (e.g., > /usr/share/evernote/thrift/1.25/foobar and > /usr/share/evernote/thrift/1.28/foobar)? No, I was suggesting that you just embed the thrift files in your qevercloud source package, as you wanted to do originally. When I said "multiple versions in the archive" I meant copies in various source packages, but not in any binary packages. > Personally I am against the separated package of evernote-thrift, and > the main reason is that it is not useful; thrift files are technically > used by no one other than evernote people; developers are > encouraged/guided to use official Evernote SDK released by evernote, > which is already a generated project from the thrift files; no one > else is parsing thrift files by him/herself. Right. They shouldn't be installed: just present in the qevernote source package for the purposes of regeneration. Could you confirm that your git repository is up-to-date with our discussion, so I can (finally!) do a review of your packaging, please? -- Sean Whitton
