[bug #42698] Recommended future steps for gnustep-dl2 debian package maintenance

[Yavor Doganov]

Follow-up Comment #5, bug #42698 (project gnustep):

> (MySQL+Postgres in one package)

Of course I meant SQLite, not MySQL.

___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/


___
Bug-gnustep mailing list
Bug-gnustep@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnustep

[bug #42698] Recommended future steps for gnustep-dl2 debian package maintenance

[Yavor Doganov]

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #42698 (project gnustep):

We can try to ship both apps with a bit of effort.  EOModeler is distributed
as a private library in Debian, because David Ayers once told us it was going
to undergo major changes.  Is the current split what he meant back then?  What
are the advantages of the new app over DBModeler?  Not working with the
palette is a big minus AFAICT.

___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/


___
Bug-gnustep mailing list
Bug-gnustep@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnustep

[bug #42698] Recommended future steps for gnustep-dl2 debian package maintenance

[Yavor Doganov]

Follow-up Comment #4, bug #42698 (project gnustep):

I am not sure it was in the same discussion.  Anyway.  The dependency on
Renaissance is not a problem at all.

> I even made the case that libEOModeler could be 
> shipped with DBModeler here 

It is exactly what we are doing.

Perhaps we should use the opportunity of the soname bump (all GDL2 libraries
need it AFAICT) to split the package in a better way.  You are correct that
the right split is into non-gui and gui stuff.  Maybe we could lump the
adaptors together (MySQL+Postgres in one package) at the expense of the
gui<->non-gui split.  That's what I did for SQLClient (all 4 bundles in the
library package), as it doesn't make sense to have separate packages for a few
KB.
The additional dependency on libmsysqlclient or libpq is negligible compared
to the things GUI/Back pull in.

___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/


___
Bug-gnustep mailing list
Bug-gnustep@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnustep

[bug #42698] Recommended future steps for gnustep-dl2 debian package maintenance

[matt rice]

Follow-up Comment #3, bug #42698 (project gnustep):

I recall that being more about limiting the number of debian packages, and
trying to find a good split of gui/non-gui,
I even made the case that libEOModeler could be shipped with DBModeler here

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnustep-dev/2010-01/msg00018.html

but i'm unaware of any reason pertaining to major changes in that discussion
except the notes to remove renaissance as a dependency which relates to
DBModeler not libEOModeler.

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnustep-dev/2010-01/msg00019.html




___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/


___
Bug-gnustep mailing list
Bug-gnustep@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnustep

[bug #42698] Recommended future steps for gnustep-dl2 debian package maintenance

[matt rice]

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #42698 (project gnustep):

On DBModeler, do as you see fit, AFAICT EOModelEditor isn't a complete
replacement for DBModeler since when changing the libEOModeler framework it
will no longer work with GDL2Palette,
and isn't compatible with the original EOModeler framework in EOF

If there is interest in DBModeler i'll set up a git repository for it
somewhere and rename the libraries to avoid the clashes that EOModelEditor
introduced, though I don't really plan on spending any further effort on it
unless there is interest.

___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/


___
Bug-gnustep mailing list
Bug-gnustep@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnustep

[bug #42698] Recommended future steps for gnustep-dl2 debian package maintenance

[Federico Gimenez Nieto]

URL:
  

 Summary: Recommended future steps for gnustep-dl2 debian
package maintenance
 Project: GNUstep
Submitted by: fgimenez
Submitted on: Mon 07 Jul 2014 07:11:31 PM CEST
Category: gdl2
Severity: 3 - Normal
  Item Group: None
  Status: None
 Privacy: Public
 Assigned to: None
 Open/Closed: Open
 Discussion Lock: Any

___

Details:

Hi, i'm a co-maintainer of the gnustep-dl2 debian package and was wondering if
are there any plannings for a new release of the project. The package is now
heavily patched to follow the latest trunk fixes and it is becoming a bit
difficult to keep track of all the changes.

Moreover, i would like to ask your opinion about what should be the future
steps to maintain the package on debian. I've seen that there is an
incompatible fork of EOModel and a new app,  EOModelEditor, that seems to have
the same functionality of DBModeler. Should these replace the old ones in the
package?

Thanks a lot, cheers





___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/


___
Bug-gnustep mailing list
Bug-gnustep@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnustep