[debian-mysql] mysql-5.7 remove dojo patch

[Bjoern Boschman]

Hi,

makes sense to me. I removed mysql-5.7/repack-no-ndb-frontend and added a
new branch mysql-5.7/dojo-lintian
<https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-mysql/mysql.git/log/?h=mysql-5.7/dojo-lintian>
which includes a debian/source/lintian-overrides file.
Source pkg would be lintian clean by now
https://www.boschman.de/jenkins/job/mysql-5.7-source/17/

Shall I merge that change to debian/master?

Cheers
B

On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 12:45 PM Lars Tangvald <lars.tangvald at oracle.com>
wrote:

>
> On 11/08/2016 12:31 PM, Robie Basak wrote:
> > Hi Bjoern,
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 11:10:10AM +0000, Bjoern Boschman wrote:
> >> there's a option to repack upstream source.
> >> I've created a branch that would include these changes:
> >>
> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-mysql/mysql.git/log/?h=mysql-5.7/repack-no-ndb-frontend
> >> What do you and the rest of the team think about this approach?
> > Thank you for proposing the branch!
> >
> > Repacking causes some additional pain for various reasons (eg. cannot
> > necessarily reproduce the same bit-identical tarball, so really only a
> > DD uploader should be producing it, so it can't be committed to the VCS
> > in advance since an uploader cannot be sure it isn't trojaned without
> > tedious verification). It's easier to stick to the upstream's release
> > tarball when possible.
> >
> > So I'd prefer to avoid repacking, which is why we tried to do it with
> > quilt in the first place IIRC. Technically AFAIK these files aren't
> > actually non-DSFG to redistribute so are permitted to be part of the
> > Debian source package; we just don't want them to form part of the
> > binary packages for policy reasons ("binaries must be buildable from
> > source that is non-minified", etc).
> >
> > OTOH, if maintaining the quilt patch (and lintian overrides, etc) is
> > really becoming painful, then I'm fine with resorting to repacking if we
> > have to do it. And your use of Files-Excluded in debian/copyright is the
> > way I'd expect it to be done in this case - thanks.
> >
> > If you do push this, then please don't push the pristine-tar branch to
> > VCS yourself any more since then the first uploader of a particular
> > upstream version will have to spend extra effort verifying it.
> >
> > That's my opinion anyway. I'd prefer not to do it this way, but if the
> > only people maintaining the exclusions want it this way, then fine.
> >
> > Lars, what's your opinion?
> As you say, I don't think the files themselves are a violation (the
> source for the minified js and swf files is also present, but the
> compiled files cause a mess of lintian errors).
> The biggest pain points of the patch are that it's really big, as Bjoern
> mentioned, and that we can't actually patch out the swf files, so we
> still get a few lintian errors. It's ugly, but I don't think it's a huge
> problem. The change itself looks good to me as well, though I'd also
> like to avoid repacking if possible. I can try another round of queries
> upstream to see if there's any chance of removing these files in future
> versions, and if that's a no we can revisit this?
>
> --
> Lars
> >
> > Please could you keep debian/changelog changes in separate commits
> > though please? This makes cherry-picking easier. IOW, don't change
> > debian/changelog in anything but its own commit, and there's no need to
> > update debian/changelog except before upload (we'll use git-dch to
> > create changelog entries from git commit logs). We had a thread about
> > this a while back.
> >
> > Robie
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-mysql-maint/attachments/20161108/364fbf6a/attachment-0001.html>