Re: Complicated re-distribution of pgjdbc the "open source way"
От | Pavel Raiskup |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Complicated re-distribution of pgjdbc the "open source way" |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1794423.Lu2CaUrfBI@nb.usersys.redhat.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Complicated re-distribution of pgjdbc the "open source way" (Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Complicated re-distribution of pgjdbc the "open source way"
Re: Complicated re-distribution of pgjdbc the "open source way" Re: Complicated re-distribution of pgjdbc the "open source way" Re: Complicated re-distribution of pgjdbc the "open source way" |
Список | pgsql-jdbc |
Hi Dave, On Monday 07 of March 2016 09:31:10 Dave Cramer wrote: > There is a far simpler way to do this. > > Simply create a Makefile, or ant build.xml, which I imagine you will have > to do anyway, and do not include the bits of the code you don't want. > > I'd be glad to include it in the source with the assumption that you > maintain it. * we were rather thinking about keeping the pom.xml as original as possible, Makefile would be additional divergence and work when pom.xml works fine * the process requires patching out some code using not-acceptable dependencies, as this is the cheapest way to deal with most of the issues for us downstream -- and we already do it to some extent * having parent-poms packaged separately just complicates the build from source, so while we are on it in separate fork, we could merge it into pgjdbc-foss Makefile or ant file would probably not lower the burden of re-distribution and build from source. Any thoughts? But yes, we can help with maintenance. Pavel > Dave Cramer > > davec@postgresintl.com > www.postgresintl.com > > On 7 March 2016 at 09:26, Pavel Raiskup <praiskup@redhat.com> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > -- > > I'm taking the liberty of CCing all pgjdbc packagers I'm aware of (please > > opt-out if you don't care and sorry for rush). I just want to see whether > > we in Fedora are thinking a constructive way. This is not GNU/Linux > > oriented effort, but it is rather about any open source > > packagers/distributors, feel free to add anybody who might be interested > > in the loop. > > -- > > > > _Open_ distribution¹ of pgjdbc is becoming a bit painful for the last > > several releases, mostly because there are some non-free/windows-only > > related _hard_-dependencies (currently osgi.enterprise, waffle-jna) which > > disallow us to build pgjdbc on free distro. > > > > The preferred way would be to solve this upstream (making the dependencies > > optional), but it is not a mandate of pgjdbc upstream to cooperate on this > > -- even patches from us to support pure open source build are not wanted. > > As upstream is not interested in non-maven builds, it will be most > > probably even worse later. > > > > We've done some small observation around GNU/Linux packages, and it seems > > we all reinvent the very similar patches or hacks over and over again. > > > > Because PostgreSQL connector is important part of operating system, we are > > thinking about a small friendly fork of pgjdbc, called pgjdbc-foss. This > > should allow us to solve the issue rather sooner than later. > > > > That project idea: > > > > * we should provide an _easy to use_ (documented how to build from > > source) version-ed tarball, compatible with pgjdbc > > > > * this tarball would be FOSS source-only, with FOSS dependencies, > > (non-free deps could be possible in future, but only as opt-in > > feature) > > > > * the build would be 1-step process (no need to build pgjdbc-parent-poms > > first, and others), with some obvious system dependencies > > > > * that tarball would allow us to 100% build-from-source _without_ tweaks > > > > * build from this tarball must not rely on maven repositories -- > > untrusted content at distribution level > > > > * the testsuite should be fixed to allow us to run it easily under > > non-root user, on a local/cloud build-box > > > > Would you be interested in having one common code-base for > > open-source-distribution-model of pgjdbc, and optionally (preferably) > > cooperate? That source should be as close as possible to pgjdbc, just > > limited limited set of patches to allow us to build/test/distribute > > correctly and what is more important we could do the job _consistently_ > > with a lot _less_ packagers effort. > > > > Just let me know if this is good/bad idea from your packackar's POV. Some > > links for discussion with upstream about issues [1,..N]. > > > > ¹ By that I mean ability to build from FOSS source, _against_ > > FOSS source dependencies. By FOSS source I mean software which > > _anybody_ can read, study, copy, modify, distribute. > > > > [1] > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1831842355.39585708.1455624950515.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com > > [2] > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2113338928.20942725.1448530160996.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com > > [3] > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/5479464.pnS2mdyLUu@nb.usersys.redhat.com > > [4] > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2217774.p6G2ev8LQ6@nb.usersys.redhat.com > > > > Pavel > > > > > > > > -- > > Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org) > > To make changes to your subscription: > > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc > >
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления:
Предыдущее
От: Dave CramerДата:
Сообщение: Re: Complicated re-distribution of pgjdbc the "open source way"
Следующее
От: Dave CramerДата:
Сообщение: Re: Complicated re-distribution of pgjdbc the "open source way"