2008/12/30 Ruben Molina rmol...@udea.edu.co:
Dear Gauthier and Eric,
Hello Ruben,
First of all, I apologize for this late reply. I didn't see your mail in
December :-\
I'm working on the RFP for vle filed by Gauthier [1] on Debian bug
tracking system (BTS), I checked your software and I have some
interest on it (I'll write to you about this later) so I changed your
RFP into a ITP some time ago, and I'm planning to maintain it under
DebianScience [2] as it looks to me like a good candidate for this
team...
Ok, ok, Great :-)
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/485985
[2] http://wiki.debian.org/DebianScience
OK, I have some questions for you:
debian/copyright
You reported 'Lucent Technologies' as copyrigth holder for some
functions in CSVReader.hpp, but you didn't include the license for
this code... Are you sure this code is available under a free software
license? If yes, please include the license statement granted by
Lucent in the sources; if not, please replace this code with a free
equivalent.
vle-0.6.0/vle/data/CSVReader.hpp:
* �...@brief Copyright (C) 1999 Lucent Technologies
* Excepted from 'The Practice of Programming'
* by Brian W. Kernighan and Rob Pike
This code adapted from a C++ original that was Copyright (C) 1999 Lucent
Technologies Excepted from 'The Practice of Programming' by Brian W.
Kernighan and Rob Pike. It included by permission
It included by permission of the http://tpop.awl.com/ and
http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/tpop/code.html web sites, which says:
You may use this code for any purpose, as long as you leave the
copyright notice and book citation attached.
But I am not sure it's valid with the GPL now. We can quickly re-write
the code, it is not long.
sonames :S
==
I have been following (and packaging) your sources since I saw the ITP
(v0.5.0) so I noted a soname change from 0 (on v0.5.2) to 0.6 (on
current version)... I hope you are no trying to change your soname
schema to follow release versions...
Was this soname bump necesary? (declaration changes? struct changes?,
functions semantics changes?)...
In fact, the API and ABI are not stables (the API of vle 0.5, 0.6 or 0.7
are incompatibles). We tend to make them stable for the version 1.0 but
it's too difficult for the moment. I thought to release a soname by
release of VLE (ie. for each 0.x). However, I understand that this is
difficult to manage them in a distribution.
I tried to check in your ChangeLog but (BTW) the file is empty.
Yes, this file is available separately on the download page of
Sourceforge. We build it with git after the release.
In any case, usually is my task to ask [4]: have you already read the
libtool manual? but you are using cmake... so: do you fully
understand hoe to manage the shared library process associated? :)
I think :-p
We are not expecting a lot of packages depending on your libraries,
but if you try to change the soname in every release, we will need to
generate new names for the binary packages on every release... and
maintain a lot of Replaces... Conflicts...
Yes, I understand.
For now, I'm packaging all your libraries in a single libvle0 package
(and its corresponding libvle-dev)... but I need to confirm how will
you be managing the sonames...
We can change the soname to 0 instead of 0.7 (in vle/CMakeLists.txt,
line 31) for the next release. No problem. VLE users don't care about
the soname. :-)
debian/watch
This file is used by DEHS [3] to monitorig new releases from upstream
(you) awaiting to be packaged.
[3] http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/
I need to define a regexp to track the released versions...
Until 0.5.2, it seems like you were using the following format in SF:
vle-*.tar.gz
In this case, I just added some mangling for the release-candidates (we
use the symbol '~' for this: 0.5.0~rc1 0.5.0, but 0.5.0-rc1 0.5.0).
Until now my regexp was:
opts=uversionmangle=s/-rc/~rc/ \
http://sf.net/vle/vle-(.+)\.tar\.gz
And it was detecting the following versions in SF: 0.1, 0.2.0, 0.3.0,
0.3.1, 0.4.0, 0.4.1, 0.5.0-rc1, 0.5.0-rc2, 0.5.0-rc3, 0.5.0, 0.5.1,
0.5.2...
But in v0.6.0 series you added some other suffixes, so now I found too:
0.6.0-Linux-i686, 0.6.0-rc1-sources, 0.6.0-rc2-sources,
0.6.0-rc3-Linux-i686, 0.6.0-rc3-sources, 0.6.0-sources...
You did't released a '0.6.0.tar.gz', but anyway, after the rc mangling,
a 0.6.0 version will be detected as: 0.6.0-rc* 0.6.0 0.6.0-sources
0.6.0-Linux-i686
Sure, I can add more mangling for the new suffixes... Or, if you are
planning to continue using the current format, I can change my regexp to
search for:
vle-*-sources.tar.gz
In this case just 0.6.0-rc*, 0.6.0 and future releases will be
detected...
Anyway... is always better to define a filename convention with you :)
Yes :-p
So, may I suggest you to continue releasing just as
