Bug#917702: jruby FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Miguel Landaeta]

On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 03:05:48PM +0100, Markus Koschany wrote:
>
> [...]
> 
> The FTBFS bug got fixed yesterday. I should complain more often. Andrej
> uploaded version 9.1.17 to unstable. This is not the latest one but I
> guess better than nothing? The original bug has not been closed yet.
> Andrej, can we close it now and Debian bug #917702 too?

Thanks a lot to Andrej for putting together a new upstream version
upload at such short notice!!

Now I think with that should be enough to fulfill the reverse
build-depends to avoid having to drop packages from the upcoming
release but I reiterate that jruby in its current state in Debian
is only usable for very simple use cases. The output from many tests
during build time is evidence of this.

Any user expecting to run production workloads with Debian's jruby
will be disappointed and they will require to use upstream artifacts,
unfortunately.

Thanks again for fixing the outstanding RC bugs on this package!!

-- 
Miguel Landaeta, nomadium at debian.org
secure email with PGP 0x6E608B637D8967E9 available at http://miguel.cc/key.
"Faith means not wanting to know what is true." -- Nietzsche


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__
This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team
.
 Please use
debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.

Bug#917702: jruby FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Andrej Shadura]

Hi,

On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 at 15:20, Emmanuel Bourg  wrote:
> Le 26/02/2019 à 15:05, Markus Koschany a écrit :
> > The FTBFS bug got fixed yesterday. I should complain more often. Andrej
> > uploaded version 9.1.17 to unstable. This is not the latest one but I
> > guess better than nothing? The original bug has not been closed yet.
> > Andrej, can we close it now and Debian bug #917702 too?
>
> Any hope to package JRuby 9.2.x? AFAIK it supports Java 11 better.

I may look into it when I have time, but at the moment it’s lower on
my todo list. We’re fighting with a lot of Java-related build failures
in Apertis, so I’m basically doing what’s most important to unblock
our further work.

-- 
Cheers,
  Andrej

__
This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team
.
 Please use
debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.

Bug#917702: jruby FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Emmanuel Bourg]

Le 26/02/2019 à 15:05, Markus Koschany a écrit :

> The FTBFS bug got fixed yesterday. I should complain more often. Andrej
> uploaded version 9.1.17 to unstable. This is not the latest one but I
> guess better than nothing? The original bug has not been closed yet.
> Andrej, can we close it now and Debian bug #917702 too?

Any hope to package JRuby 9.2.x? AFAIK it supports Java 11 better.

Emmanuel Bourg

__
This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team
.
 Please use
debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.

Bug#917702: jruby FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Markus Koschany]

Hi,

Am 25.02.19 um 19:40 schrieb Miguel Landaeta:
> Hi Markus,
> 
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 08:39:48PM +0100, Markus Koschany wrote:
>> JRuby is a mess. I guess we "just" need to package the latest upstream
>> release to fix the FTBFS bugs. Nobody felt like doing that in the past
>> twelve months, so I think it is unrealistic to believe we can make it
>> happen within one week. Of course if the release team can be convinced
>> to accept a new upstream release there might be additional time left.
> 
> I agree, jruby is a mess, mostly because of me since I didn't have
> almost any time during this release cycle to work on it.
> 
> I think jruby should be dropped from buster and a new libspring-java
> upload should be prepared shortly, to disable jruby support in it.
> 
> It's not realistic to think that a new upstream release for jruby can
> be prepared in a week and that will work to be well supported during
> the next stable release life cycle.
> 
> Cheers,
> Miguel.

The FTBFS bug got fixed yesterday. I should complain more often. Andrej
uploaded version 9.1.17 to unstable. This is not the latest one but I
guess better than nothing? The original bug has not been closed yet.
Andrej, can we close it now and Debian bug #917702 too?

Regards,

Markus





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
__
This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team
.
 Please use
debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.