Bug#515793: ITP: CGIT -- C-code Web Front-end to GIT
On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 9:20 PM, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Marc, Marc Singer wrote: On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 6:36 PM, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote: Did you mean this to be a private reply? Not really. Ok, cc-ing the bug. [...] The policy of the git authors is their prerogative. They've made it very clear that they will not support a shared library. I suppose if you could manage the SO as part of the debian packages. Doing so puts the burden on us to track API changes with no promised from upstream. Is this what you are proposing? You're presumably thinking of http://bugs.debian.org/407722. No, I agree with Gerrit and think that shipping libgit.a as a library is a non-starter. Git's internal APIs (that's what libgit.a is) are very unstable, and to provide it as a package, even with a constantly changing name, would be to make an interface promise we couldn't keep. Instead, I was offering to build cgit from the *same* source package as git. I would probably try to upstream the change (putting a submodule with cgit under contrib/), but even if upstream does not accept it, we could build cgit in Debian this way. The main (and only) advantage of this approach is that when an API break causes cgit to stop working, git would FTBFS. This immediate feedback would force the code to keep working together. Hoping that clarifies, Jonathan Sounds like a good plan. Do you need my help?
Bug#515793: ITP: CGIT -- C-code Web Front-end to GIT
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Marc, Marc Singer wrote: Do you need my help? Yes, because I do not use cgit. We would need an active user to make sure it keeps working and to evaluate requests that come in through the BTS. In other words, I do not want to be the cgit package maintainer, even though I'd be fine with having the cgit binary package produced by the git source package. Another way to help is to provide any existing starts to packaging cgit in another way, which would provide lots of hints about packaging decisions. That's why I asked whether any work-in-progress packaging exists. OK. I'll take a look at where it stands. I didn't spend any time on the package once I found out that there was no library in our future. I'm guessing that it will be a month before I can take a look at this. I'll send a message when I have a chance to review the package.
Bug#515793: Get cgit included with statically linked libgit.a?
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 2:26 AM, Paul Menzel pm.deb...@googlemail.comwrote: Am Sonntag, den 07.03.2010, 15:51 -0800 schrieb Marc Singer: On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Paul Menzel pm.deb...@googlemail.com wrote: Am Dienstag, den 17.02.2009, 09:40 -0800 schrieb Marc Singer: The upstream build of cgit requires a download of git to build libgit which this package links statically. Thus, this package practically depends on a change to git-core. http://hjemli.net/git/cgit/ the blocking bug 407722 [1] is marked »wontfix« and judging from the answers on my question sent to the Git list (also cc-ed to [1]) it looks like the only option is to link statically against libgit. :( Can some Debian Developers please comment on this? And if no other solution is proposed could we get cgit included into the Debian package repository and with luck cgit might be available in Debian squeeze. I'm not optimistic that the git developers will support development against the library. It's really a shame since it would benefit some kinds of projects that are performance bound You are right, as can be seen by the replies to bug #407722 [1]. So we should deal with this situation and link against libgit statically. What do I miss? IMHO, that would be an unwise path. The GIT developers are committed to being able to change the interface. Seems like the design of cgit needs to change in order to move forward. [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=407722
Bug#515793: Get cgit included with statically linked libgit.a?
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Paul Menzel pm.deb...@googlemail.comwrote: Dear Marc, Am Dienstag, den 17.02.2009, 09:40 -0800 schrieb Marc Singer: The upstream build of cgit requires a download of git to build libgit which this package links statically. Thus, this package practically depends on a change to git-core. http://hjemli.net/git/cgit/ the blocking bug 407722 [1] is marked »wontfix« and judging from the answers on my question sent to the Git list (also cc-ed to [1]) it looks like the only option is to link statically against libgit. :( Can some Debian Developers please comment on this? And if no other solution is proposed could we get cgit included into the Debian package repository and with luck cgit might be available in Debian squeeze. I'm not optimistic that the git developers will support development against the library. It's really a shame since it would benefit some kinds of projects that are performance bound
Bug#515793: ITP: CGIT -- C-code Web Front-end to GIT
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist The upstream build of cgit requires a download of git to build libgit which this package links statically. Thus, this package practically depends on a change to git-core. http://hjemli.net/git/cgit/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#192730: ITP: annoyance-filter
On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 10:55:48PM +0200, Thomas Scheffczyk wrote: Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Hello, I intend to create a package for 'annoyance-filter'. It's always nice to have options. Is there something compelling about using annoyance-filter over bogofilter?
