GNU bug report logs - #40677
Jami

Previous Next

Full log

Message #248 received at 40677 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Jan <tona_kosmicznego_smiecia <at> interia.pl>
To: Mathieu Othacehe <m.othacehe <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 40677 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#40677] [PATCH 13/18] gnu: pjproject, pjproject-jami:
 Remove broken pjproject package. Make pjproject-jami package stand-alone by
 moving package code from pjproject into it.
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 13:42:08 +0200

On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 11:39:11 +0200
Mathieu Othacehe <m.othacehe <at> gmail.com> wrote:

> >  
> >  (define-public pjproject-jami
> >    (package
> > -    (inherit pjproject)
> >      (name "pjproject-jami")
> > +    (version "2.9")
> > +    (source
> > +     (origin
> > +       (method git-fetch)
> > +       (uri (git-reference
> > +             (url "https://github.com/pjsip/pjproject.git")
> > +             (commit "5dfa75be7d69047387f9b0436dd9492bbbf03fe4")))
> > +       (modules '((guix build utils)))  
> 
> pjproject is used by packages such as asterisk (not yet packaged). So
> I would prefer to keep pjproject, even if it's currently broken.
> 
> WDYT?
> 
> Mathieu

Should I revert the change and make pjproject-jami inherit from it
again? Is inheriting from a dead package even worth it for just two
packages?
Moving the code from pjproject to pjproject-jami actually made it easier
to maintain. If someone packages asteriks, they will have to copy the
code, modify it with configure flags, add missing dependencies and use
a different version, because Jami uses a custom version so patching
work.

We can keep the broken package, but I would like to keep my
pjproject-jami without inheritance as it is after my changes.
It is just easier to maintain this way.

But if I'm wrong, then I can just inherit from pjproject as it was
before. I'm not an experienced contributor after all.


Jan Wielkiewicz

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.