[Pkg-julia-devel] Julia 0.6

[Peter Colberg]

On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 02:44:48PM -0400, Peter Colberg wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 05:14:53PM +0200, Graham Inggs wrote:
> > On 06/07/2017 03:36, Peter Colberg wrote:
> > > After a bit more pondering, this does not actually address your point
> > > about the circular build dependency. Regardless of whether packages
> > > depend on julia or not, those needed to build the documentation will
> > > most likely have to be updated in lockstep with julia.
> > >
> > > So yes, it seems advisable splitting the documentation into a separate
> > > source package to avoid a bootstrapping issue with new major releases.
> > 
> > After some pondering here, I think this might not actually be a problem.
> > Surely we can generate the documentation after building the new julia
> > binary, and using the new julia binary?  In which case julia will not need
> > to build-depend on julia.
> 
> I am more concerned about a julia build-dependency of the module
> packages. For modules with a test suite, we surely want to run tests
> during the build process. Suppose one of the modules must be updated
> to the latest version to build the julia documentation, and that
> module’s test suite happens to require the latest julia version, then
> we have a circular dependency. The chain could be broken manually by
> building that module with DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nocheck and uploading
> source and binary, but that is a nuissance avoided with a separate
> julia-doc source package.

On the other hand, lintian mentions "testsuite-autopkgtest-missing"
recently of severity wishlist. If module packages use autopkgtest
instead of build tests, a Build-Depends on julia is not needed.

Peter