[Debian-ha-maintainers] libqb_0.17.1-1_amd64.changes is NEW

[Christoph Berg]

Re: Ferenc Wagner 2015-04-26 <871tj6fv8j.fsf at lant.ki.iif.hu>
> > Most notably, I've omitted the soname bump, as we should only deviate
> > from upstream if there's an actual reason. So far I haven't seen any
> > problems with the new libqb version (though I haven't tried too hard
> > yet).
> 
> Maybe I should ping https://github.com/ClusterLabs/libqb/issues/134, in
> case the libqb maintainers have something to add.

Nod.

> > Feri, if you have more to add, can you push that to the alioth repo?
> 
> More to remove.

Heh :)

> I'd like to declare the library package Multi-Arch:
> same, but the triplets are dropped from the paths.  The commit message
> of 526b3844 does not explain this move (and enabling dependency tracking
> does not buy us anything anyway).  So I prefer my 2d880746.

Looks like the newly added override_dh_auto_configure call there
broken the default paths. We should fix that.

> I also added a couple of more relations:
> Package: libqb-doc
> Recommends: w3m | www-browser
> Suggests: libqb-dev

(tbd)

> The left-behind docs/doxygen_sqlite3.db is a good catch, but that should
> be cleaned by the upstream docs/Makefile.am, so an upstreamable patch
> would be more useful than bringing in the debian/clean big hammer.

Well it needs to be fixed now so the package actually builds (twice).
But an upstream fix is also necessary. Will open a pull request
soonish if no one beats me to it.

> Especially that .version (according to build-aux/git-version-gen) should
> be present in the distribution tarball (pity we've only got a git tag).
> Thus I created a patch for bringing .version in.  This will complain
> loudly when upstream fixes this problem.  The same goes for another
> missing file, .tarball-version, too.
> 
> > it's correct that the upload needed to be removed to get a proper
> > orig tarball in place
> 
> Have you found a proper upstream distribution tarball for 0.17.1?  If
> you mean the GitHub tag links, I wonder how stable they results are...

I've somewhat given up on asking for proper tarball releases. Folks
using github sometimes don't release at all, so git tags are already a
big improvement. The tarballs retrieved from github should be stable,
but I haven't double-checked. It works for lots of package, I guess
changing checksums would have shown up somewhere.

> >>> I've just noticed your activity in the debian-ha repo.  AFAIK, replacing
> >>> the Doxygen-installed jquery.js by a pure jquery.js from jQuery is
> >>> specifically recommended against by the Doxygen developers, because
> >>> their jquery.js contains other code besides jQuery.
> >
> > Upstreams tend to recommend using embedded code copies a lot. Is there
> > any documentation what they actually changed in jquery?
> 
> So, but see doxygen itself for a more detailed description of the problems:
> https://sources.debian.net/src/doxygen/1.8.8-5/debian/README.jquery/

Thanks for the pointer. Helmut knows his stuff, so let's revert this
change.

Christoph
-- 
cb at df7cb.de | http://www.df7cb.de/