[pkg-gnupg-maint] cpp/qt bindings status

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor]

Hi Sandro--

On Sun 2016-10-09 21:18:02 -0400, Sandro Knauß wrote:

> I now have managed to build the cpp and qt bindings.

yay, this is great!

> We have no clash with libnames, because the libs are names libgpgmepp6
> (old name was libgpgme++2) and libqgpgme6 (old name was
> libkf5gpgmepp5). so we don't need Replace/Break for those. Do we need
> for this a transition?

We will need a transition in the sense that we want to encourage people
building against the newer libraries, i think, so it's the -dev part of
the transition that is likely to be tricky.

> The only thing I wanted to check if libgpgme11-dev conficts with the other -dev 
> packages.

yes, i think we will, because kdepimlibs5-dev has usr/include/gpgme++
and /usr/include/qgpgme and usr/lib/gpgmepp, which we will probably want
in libgpgme11-dev or in some separate -dev package.  This means we might
need a rebuild of kdepimlibs with the gpgme stuff removed, right?  and
we might decide to just drop the gpgmepp source package from debian
entirely.

So one question is whether we should break out separate libqpgme-dev and
libgpgmepp-dev packages, or whether we should (as you've already done)
keep it simple and put all the -dev stuff into a single package?

> Btw. why are the dev package has a version inside?

i think you're asking why the package name has a "11" in it.  TBH, i'm
not entirely sure.  this happened back in 2003 (around 0.4.0 and 0.4.1),
long before i was involved packaging gpgme.  Also, the source package is
named gpgme1.0, and it has been since 2004.

in an ideal (non-legacy, fine-grained) world, i think:

 * the source package would be renamed "gpgme"

 * the -dev binary package would be either libgpgme-dev or gpgme-dev

 * we would have separate -dev packages for libgpgmepp-dev and
   libqgpgme-dev, so that a minimal build system could install only what
   it needs without needing to (for example) drag in all of QT when it
   just needs to build against GPGME or GPGMEPP.  More realistically, we
   might just have a single libgpgmepp-dev package that provides
   build-deps for both QT and KDE.

To deal with legacy, maybe we would need to add a dummy transitional
package from libgpgme11-dev to libgpgme-dev, or just have it Provides:
libgpgme11-dev.

Then we'd need to safely handle the transition from kdepimlibs5-dev for
those packages which build-depend upon it.  Perhaps the updated
kdepimlibs5-dev package (which stops building libqgpgme and libgpgmepp)
could explictly Depend: on the newly-introduced libgpgmepp-dev package.
how does this sound?

> You can look at my changes at my personal clone:
> https://anonscm.debian.org/git/users/hefee/gpgme.git

This is great, Sandro.  Thanks!  If you're OK with me merging from
there, i'll pull your changes into the branch i'm working on.

I'm currently aiming to do an upload to experimental with a bunch of
these changes, including the renames proposed above.  

Barring any complaints or objections from any of the maintainers here, i
aim to have an upload to experimental later this week.

     --dkg
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 930 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-gnupg-maint/attachments/20161012/c356ab71/attachment.sig>