[Pkg-owncloud-maintainers] php-sabre-vobject packaging (was: Introducing myself)

[Evert Pot]

> That could be done, sure. Even more easily that it has not yet been
> shipped in Debian stable, and that we are considering removing it from
> Wheezy before it becomes stable (since it will be difficult for us to
> maintain the 1.6.2 version in the next few years).

Not having to maintain it for 3 years sounds like a good thing to me too :)

> 
>> 2. Both the sabre-dav and sabre-vobject package depend on composers autoloader
>> to do, well, autoloading. Is this something you guys intend to handle?
> 
> I must admit I haven’t yet put much thoughts about it, but thanks for
> asking, we should have that in mind soon to make this right.
> 
> Evert, since you’re here, I’m wondering how to use the build.xml in
> sabre-dav: I don’t know much about these things (I’m new at all this
> ownCloud packaging), and simply running ant miserably fails for me:
> 
> 	$ ant
> Buildfile: /home/taffit/debian/php-sabredav/build.xml
> 
> init:
> 
> BUILD FAILED
> […]/build.xml:69: Problem: failed to create task or type adhoc-task
> Cause: The name is undefined.
> Action: Check the spelling.
> Action: Check that any custom tasks/types have been declared.
> Action: Check that any <presetdef>/<macrodef> declarations have taken place.
> 
> Thanks in advance for any advice or pointer to some documentation.

The build file can only be run using phing. They modeled their build scripts after ant, but they're not compatible.
The easiest way to get phing, is to have composer installed and run:

composer update --dev

This will install all the development dependencies for sabredav in vendor/, including phing and phpunit.

The only kinda-useful thing the phing script will do though, is creating a zip file for distribution though, you don't really need it for anything else. It's certainly not a requirement to run SD.

> On a related note, Thomas (Goirand) just advised to maintain the new
> php-sabre-vobject package under the PKG PHP PEAR group [0]. This makes
> sense to me, so is there any downside to moving it? (I’d assume not and
> will do so tomorrow unless someones speak against this proposal).
> 
> 	0: http://bugs.debian.org/704008#14

SabreDAV is no longer a pear package, I don't know if that influences that decision :)

Cheers,
Evert