On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 10:08 AM Chow Loong Jin <hyper...@debian.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 07:50:21AM +0200, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 6:03 AM Chow Loong Jin <hyper...@debian.org> wrote: > > > * Package name : nanosvg > > > Version : 0~git20221204.1.9da543e > > > Upstream Contact: https://github.com/memononen/nanosvg/issues > > > * URL : https://github.com/memonenen/nanosvg > > > > https://github.com/memononen/nanosvg > > Whoops, nice catch thanks. > > > > * License : zlib > > > Programming Lang: C > > > Description : simple svg parsing library > > > > > > NanoSVG is a simple stupid single-header-file SVG parse. The output of > > > the parser is a list of cubic bezier shapes. > > [...] > > > I will be packaging this library under the Debian 3-D Printing Packages > > > team as a build-dependency of slic3r-prusa. > > > > 4 years ago the project was declared as not actively maintained: > > > > * > > https://github.com/memononen/nanosvg/commit/25241c5a8f8451d41ab1b02ab2d865b01600d949 > > Yep I realize that, but unfortunately, while there is a network of > forks, there doesn't seem to be a clear de-facto "upstream" apart from > this one as far as I can tell. fltk's fork[1] appears to be the only one > with versioned git tags, but it has no issue tracker or way to contact > upstream short of creating a pull request. memononen's repo seems to be > the original and the only one in the network with issues enabled. > > My intention here is to package the latest git snapshot of > memononen/nanosvg, with the patch for this commit[2] from fltk/nanosvg > applied for the use of slic3r-prusa 2.6.0. > > If this isn't acceptable, the only alternative I can see is to bundle > the nanosvg headers somewhere in `debian/` or as a separate component > tarball in slic3r-prusa, and patch slic3r-prusa's build system to use > that, now that slic3r-prusa upstream's unbundled their copy. > > I had also considered asking slic3r-prusa's upstream to just bundle the > copy of nanosvg that they need, but I think Debian generally leans > towards unbundling libraries, not bundling new ones. > > I'm open to ideas -- I'm not sure what the best course of action is > here.
Fair enough, at least you are aware of the issue from day one. Good luck :) Thanks for packaging nanosvg !