Le 6/12/2016 à 16:31, tony mancill a écrit : > <long stream of expletives deleted>... I'm frustrated by this because > I thought we had addressed the compile-time rdeps by building everything > and reaching out to package maintainers when there was compile-time > breakage. And I didn't anticipate the run-time breakage.
This one was really tricky, nobody could have anticipated it with our current tools. We would need a kind of static analyzer that scans all classes in the Debian packages and reports if any type, method of field can't be resolved. Bonus point if we can couple that with Britney to prevent the packages breaking the binary compatibility from transitioning to testing. > I think it is worth discussing how best to support Java applications in > main, since it often feels like we're swimming against the stream trying > to support system-level JARs for everything packaged for Debian. We don't have many options if we want to stay within the bounds defined by the Debian rules. I think we have to find the balance between adapting the packages to the latest version of their dependencies, and maintaining several versions of the same package to avoid compatibility issues. if a package often breaks the compatibility and isn't security sensitive, then maintaining more than one version is probably more efficient (jgoodies and guava fall into this category). > But short-term, I'd like to ask for the team's input on what I needs to > do to clean up the mess I have made by introducing the new version. Is > it sufficient to rebuild all rdeps and then upload after a quick > run-time test? I think so. Emmanuel Bourg
