Bug#639910: Packaging sbt

Hi Emmanuel/people, [Let me know if putting 2 mailings in Cc is making too much noise.] I'm looking for a sponsor for a 1st dependency I submitted on @mentors ( http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=855941 ) A few others should follow to bring a running sbt, but I'd like to show a first

Bug#639910: Packaging sbt

On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 23:16:52 +0100, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Le 18/11/2016 à 14:41, Frederic Bonnard a écrit : > > Hi Frederic, > > > There is much work to finalize this if that is ok, but indeed, before > > continuing I'd like to know if I'm on the good path. > > This

Bug#639910: Packaging sbt

Hi Marko and thanks for answering :) > Sorry, I didn't try to understand the details of your latest effort, but > just to give you a heads up - I was/have been working on packaging SBT > too. No problem with that, that may not be trivial and well explained > A couple of months ago or so I

Bug#639910: Packaging sbt

Hi Marko, Le 8/12/2016 à 21:56, Marko Dimjašević a écrit : > In a nutshell, Emmanuel packaged Scala 2.10 because it's a dependency > for SBT, and the scala package moved to 2.11.8 in the meantime. Me being > a newbie wrt Debian packaging had a hard time using it in the form he > made it

Bug#639910: Packaging sbt

Le 18/11/2016 à 14:41, Frederic Bonnard a écrit : Hi Frederic, > There is much work to finalize this if that is ok, but indeed, before > continuing I'd like to know if I'm on the good path. This looks like a valid approach. Did you use Scala 2.10 or 2.11 for compiling SBT? If you have a

Bug#639910: Packaging sbt

Hi Frederic, On Thu, 2016-12-08 at 14:38 +0100, Frederic Bonnard wrote: > Sorry to ping you on that again. > Any one having feedback on the validity of that bootstrap process ? Mehdi ? > Emmanuel ? :) Sorry, I didn't try to understand the details of your latest effort, but just to give you a

Bug#639910: Packaging sbt

Sorry to ping you on that again. Any one having feedback on the validity of that bootstrap process ? Mehdi ? Emmanuel ? :) Thanks, F. On Fri, 18 Nov 2016 14:41:27 +0100, Frederic Bonnard wrote: > Hello Mehdi/Emmanuel/all, > back on that topic, I did some work and

Bug#639910: Packaging sbt

Hello Mehdi/Emmanuel/all, back on that topic, I did some work and would need your feedback on it before going further. What Mehdi said in his last comment, inspired me the following : For sbt source package, I created 4 "sources" tarball : 1. sbt_0.13.13~RC1.orig.tar.gz : this is the upstream

Bug#639910: Packaging sbt

Hi, as Medhi suggested to me, I'm forwarding my questions here to debian Java packaging team. (Medhi answered in the bug : https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=639910#89 ) Any tip will be appreciated. Thanks, F. > Hi, > I'd be interested in packaging sbt in debian, and I saw the

Bug#639910: Packaging sbt

Le 5/01/2016 15:58, Frederic Bonnard a écrit : > Hi, > as Medhi suggested to me, I'm forwarding my questions here to debian Java > packaging team. > (Medhi answered in the bug : > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=639910#89 ) > Any tip will be appreciated. Hi Frederic, Fabio

Bug#639910: Packaging sbt

Hi, On 05/01/2016 16:32, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > The "easiest" solution is probably to start with a non-free sbt package > containing a prebuilt version of sbt, and then upload in main a sbt > package depending on itself with the prebuilt sbt removed. I would use > only one sbt package, instead