Please package libgda-5.0

[Murray Cumming]

libgda-5.0 can install in parallel with libgda-4.0. It will soon have a stable 5.0.0 release and is already the focus of libgda development.

It is required by glom 1.20. Anjuta can build with it instead of libgda-4.0.

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

Thanks Murray, sorry for the lack of responsiveness on the packages in this stack, we don't have anyone actively maintaining those in Ubuntu at the moment (we could help people to do that if you know somebody who would like to jump in please let us know we can be active to work with them to get started and have their work sponsored), we will make sure things are in shape for the LTS

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

Note for the bug, there is a package on https://launchpad.net/~openismus-team/+archive/ppa/+packages?field.name_filter=libgda&field.series_filter=oneiric which can be used as a base for review and update

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

Today I looked the ppa version, some comments:

* the -bin binary conflicts with the previous version one because they both ship those binaries: gda-list-config gda-sql gda-list-server-op

solutions:
- use a Conflicts in the control to declare that both can't be installed at the same time
- drop the non versioned named for the non default version (i.e pick one between 4 and 5 to be default)
- use alternatives to let user select the default version (it's a bit harder to handle from the packaging and user sides)

* the -dev and -doc binaries conflict because they both ship Gda-5.0.gir

* libgda-5.0-common.preinst doesn't seem required, it seems a "clean on upgrade" leftover from the previous series due to a packaging error by then.

* libgda-5.0-doc.doc-base.libgda4-reference

shouldn't the filename and title be updated gda4->gda5

Otherwise the update looks fine. I would welcome a comment with your upstream view on the conflicts question.
Do you want to fix those issues and submit a new package or do you prefer us to deal with fixing and uploading and giving you a diff showing what we changed? Out of the conflict issue which needs a bit of thinking the others are trivial to do and I'm happy to do it for you

Note that I would also welcome your upstream opinion on the configure options used in the rules. Would it be better if we did enable the ui option later in another upload? What would it add, and is there anything needed it? That seems like it would require extra packaging change so better to get the update in first and do iterative tweaks later

[Murray Cumming (murrayc)]

> they both ship those binaries: gda-list-config gda-sql gda-list-server-op

Those are symlinks to the actual *-5.0 binaries, though that symlinking is done by the upstream build. What do you recommend? If nothing else does this then I guess we can remove the symlinks from upstream libgda.

Conflicts just makes it impossible to use them though they are meant to be usable in parallel. Using an alternatives system sounds like it might need tedious manual intervention for everyone installing the package. I would like to just do what you say is best.

> * the -dev and -doc binaries conflict because they both ship Gda-5.0.gir
> * libgda-5.0-common.preinst doesn't seem required, it seems a "clean on upgrade" leftover from the previous series due to a packaging error by then.
> * libgda-5.0-doc.doc-base.libgda4-reference: shouldn't the filename and title be updated gda4->gda5

Fixed in libgda5_5.0.2-0ubuntu1openismus3

However, I don't know which packages should have these locale files:

E: /var/cache/apt/archives/libgda-5.0-doc_5.0.2-0ubuntu1openismus3_all.deb: trying to overwrite '/usr/share/locale/hu/LC_MESSAGES/libgda-5.0.mo', which is also in package libgda-5.0-common 5.0.2-0ubuntu1openismus3

> Would it be better if we did enable the ui option later in another upload? What would it add, and is there anything needed it? > That seems like it would require extra packaging change so better to get the update in first and do iterative tweaks later

I think it should definitely use --without-ui, as it does now, unless you want to do the work to split the libgda-ui out into separate packages. The libgda-ui API should be packaged separately, because it has UI (GTK+, goocanvas, X) dependencies and is an entirely different kind of API, providing GTK+ widgets. I strongly object to it even being in the same upstream tarball. Packaging libgda-ui for debian/Ubuntu is a separate issue, though I don't personally need it.

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

Ok, thanks.

I've tried to get that moving a bit further today and commited to the Debian pkg-gnome official packaging svn:
http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-gnome/packages/unstable/libgda5/

then asked if somebody could do another review and help pushing it to the archive there (then we can sync in Ubuntu). If that happens great, otherwise I will have a look to fixing the small remaining glitches and uploaded to Ubuntu (if nobody beats me to it)

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

Ok, the package got uploaded and accepted in Debian today:
http://packages.qa.debian.org/libg/libgda5.html

it should be synced to Ubuntu soon

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

Ok, one done: https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+source/libgda5 ;-)

[Murray Cumming (murrayc)]

Wow. I did not expect you to get it into debian first. That is above and beyond. Thanks.