[Debian-med-packaging] Bug#833004: Do you have resources to look after ball? [progress info]

[Danny Edel]

Control: block 784451 by 832420

On 11/10/2016 09:13 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I take the freedom to turn this discussion into a public one
> and CC the relevant bugs to leave a record there that something is
> happening.

Hello Andreas,

that is fine with me.  I'll keep the bugs in CC too.

> Hmmm, may be we should base the packaging on a later upstream commit?
> 
>> Among
>> other things, upstream also migrated from Qt4 to Qt5, and incorporated a
>> few fixes for recent boost.
> 
> We somehow should target to Qt5 anyway (see #784451) better sooner than
> later.
>  

For now, I have backported the fixes to the released, but Qt4-based
1.4.3~beta1 version, to resolve the current FTBFS with a targeted fix.
The changes are uploaded to the debian-med/ball repository on alioth,
pending your review and upload.

In that process, I tried building various stages of upstream master, and
bae96ab4 'Merge branch issue_596' might be a candidate for a snapshot
(entire testsuite passes).  However, there is the problem that
QtWebEngine is not yet included in Debian, so I could only build recent
master if I explicitly disabled support with -DUSE_QTWEBENGINE=OFF.  I
am not sure if this would be a good thing for users.

I added a blocking relationship to the ITP of QtWebEngine, I hope I
didn't mix up the numbers.  The changelog contains a Closes: clause on
both FTBFS issues, even though I could only test amd64.  Feel free to
remove those before uploading if that's an issue.

Cheers,
	Danny