checkbox-dev team mailing list archive

[Sylvain Pineau <sylvain.pineau@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 03/31/2015 04:22 PM, Zygmunt Krynicki wrote:
> Hey.
>
> Merge requests [1] and [2] add some new dependencies on a few
> javascript libraries. In order to stay compatible with Debian and to
> be able to keep pushing our packages there I'd like to ensure we have
> someone (Sylvain?) that looks after packaging those libraries and
> uploading them for Debian.
I've started to build jquery, jquery-mobile and Chart.js in my ppa to 
make sure
I can propose new versions to debian soon.
I'll contact the Debian javascript team to see if I can do NMU for the 
jquery libs.
> If that's not the case I'll need to remove them as patches in our
> Debian packaging. This means that the HTML exporter won't look like
> it's about to (with the branch that Sylvain wrote) and I will need to
> maintain a basic, javascript-free version instead.
Since the new report is for certification use, I'd suggest to start 
working on making
exporters a new unit type (this is actually story 1229 in our backlog).
The new report could be such a unit that we will only provide with cert 
and cdts.
Now that we have the jinja2 exporter, both xml and html can be created from
templates, so for Debian/Ubuntu I would continue to provide the legacy 
html report
until the new js dependencies are available in Debian.
> To let you understand the problem better please keep two points in mind:
> - Anything new we depend on must exist in Debian or we must work on
> getting it there. This might involve upgrading an existing version or
> might involve creating a whole new package. If the package is
> non-trivial to build it may also involve extra work that we must do.
> - Anything we bundle must be crystal-clear from the copyright point of
> view (in any doubt ask the Canonical legal team) and must be in a form
> that Debian approves of. For javascript libraries that excludes
> minified variants. I'm not quite sure if it also includes non-minified
> variants that were built by some other tool as it's not the preferred
> form for making modifications.
>
> Those rules are important. Dependencies allow us to reuse code and get
> stuff done faster but they are not free lunch. We need to be
> responsible about making sure they are available to us. Ubuntu 16.04
> is not that far away and to be there, without removing any feature
> we'd like to ship, we must plan ahead. That might involve reaching out
> to various legal teams. That might involve reaching out to the
> javascript packaging community in Debian to understand why some things
> are not being updated. That might involve actively working on removing
> any roadblocks so that our needs are served.
>
> Thanks
> ZK
>
> [1] https://code.launchpad.net/~sylvain-pineau/checkbox/ppa-packaging-plainbox-jinja2/+merge/248865
> [2] https://code.launchpad.net/~sylvain-pineau/checkbox/ppa-packaging-checkbox-ng-jinja2/+merge/248867