Обсуждение: Packaging of postgresql-jdbc
Hello pg-hackers, I need advice about postgresql-jdbc driver. Current version in Fedora is behind latest version of postgresql-jdbc (1200 vs 1207). We are trying to package latest version into Fedora, but there are dependencies, which are not useless in Fedora (waffle-jna)and ones which we are not 100% open source (osgi-enterprise). We talked with upstream quite intensively but notbeen able to find any solution which would meet our requirements. We think that it's not a good, when open-source project depending on packages, which licence is not 100% clear. Do you have any ideas how we could solve this problem? It's quite easy to remove it but it's not best solutions because there is a chance that with each release we would have towork on removing. (Gentoo is doing this way : https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/tree/dev-java/jdbc-postgresql ) Other distros seem to have similar problem (https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libpgjava). We will be thankful for any idea. Pavel Kajaba
On 16 February 2016 at 20:15, Pavel Kajaba <pkajaba@redhat.com> wrote:
Hello pg-hackers,
I need advice about postgresql-jdbc driver.
Current version in Fedora is behind latest version of postgresql-jdbc (1200 vs 1207).
We are trying to package latest version into Fedora, but there are dependencies, which are not useless in Fedora (waffle-jna)
Which *are* useless in Fedora. I know that was just an editing mistake. It's a library used in PgJDBC for windows SSPI support.
I don't really see the problem here. If your packaging policy prevents you from incorporating it, patch it out. It's use is simple, self-contained and already optional.
and ones which we are not 100% open source (osgi-enterprise). We talked with upstream quite intensively but not been able to find any solution which would meet our requirements.
... which you should probably outline here, because otherwise nobody will understand the problem.
We think that it's not a good, when open-source project depending on packages, which licence is not 100% clear.
Well, frankly, that's Java. So long as they're soft-dependencies I really don't care.
Oh, Pavel probably forgot to CC pgjdbc, fixing. Forwarded message from Craig Ringer: ==================================== On 16 February 2016 at 20:15, Pavel Kajaba <pkajaba@redhat.com> wrote: > Hello pg-hackers, > > I need advice about postgresql-jdbc driver. > > Current version in Fedora is behind latest version of postgresql-jdbc > (1200 vs 1207). > > We are trying to package latest version into Fedora, but there are > dependencies, which are not useless in Fedora (waffle-jna) Which *are* useless in Fedora. I know that was just an editing mistake. It's a library used in PgJDBC for windows SSPI support. I don't really see the problem here. If your packaging policy prevents you from incorporating it, patch it out. It's use is simple, self-contained and already optional. > and ones which we are not 100% open source (osgi-enterprise). We talked > with upstream quite intensively but not been able to find any solution > which would meet our requirements. > ... which you should probably outline here, because otherwise nobody will understand the problem. > We think that it's not a good, when open-source project depending on > packages, which licence is not 100% clear. > Well, frankly, that's Java. So long as they're soft-dependencies I really don't care.
On 16 February 2016 at 07:50, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
As Craig said, if you want to build it, patch it out, and create a ant/Makefile to make the jar.
On 16 February 2016 at 20:15, Pavel Kajaba <pkajaba@redhat.com> wrote:Hello pg-hackers,
I need advice about postgresql-jdbc driver.
Current version in Fedora is behind latest version of postgresql-jdbc (1200 vs 1207).
We are trying to package latest version into Fedora, but there are dependencies, which are not useless in Fedora (waffle-jna)Which *are* useless in Fedora. I know that was just an editing mistake. It's a library used in PgJDBC for windows SSPI support.I don't really see the problem here. If your packaging policy prevents you from incorporating it, patch it out. It's use is simple, self-contained and already optional.and ones which we are not 100% open source (osgi-enterprise). We talked with upstream quite intensively but not been able to find any solution which would meet our requirements.... which you should probably outline here, because otherwise nobody will understand the problem.We think that it's not a good, when open-source project depending on packages, which licence is not 100% clear.Well, frankly, that's Java. So long as they're soft-dependencies I really don't care.
I've already explained the JDBC position here.
There is an impedance mismatch between the java ecosystem and distros.
We have moved to maven as have most other java projects.
As Craig said, if you want to build it, patch it out, and create a ant/Makefile to make the jar.
Pavel Raiskup <praiskup@redhat.com> writes:
> Oh, Pavel probably forgot to CC pgjdbc, fixing.
In fact, this is completely off-topic for pgsql-hackers, please confine
the discussion to pgsql-jdbc.
regards, tom lane