GNU bug report logs - #41360
[PATCH 00/12] Package java-openjfx

Previous Next

Full log

Message #191 received at 41360 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Julien Lepiller <julien <at> lepiller.eu>
Cc: 41360 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Ioannis Kappas <ioannis.kappas <at> gmail.com>,
 Alexey Abramov <levenson <at> mmer.org>
Subject: Re: [bug#41360] [PATCH 00/12] Package java-openjfx
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 19:32:48 +0200

Le Tue, 21 Jun 2022 10:30:20 +0200,
Alexey Abramov via Guix-patches via <guix-patches <at> gnu.org> a écrit :

> Hi
> 
> I am glad that you find these patches helpful. I tried to apply your
> finalized patches, but seems like java-openjfx-build-web-js-test.patch
> is still missing. 
> 
> Regarding the patches themselves, I agree with Ludo. They are indeed
> hard to maintain. The best approach here would be to pack gradle, so
> we could build not only 8.u202 but later versions as well. And more!
> It seems like it can be build with ant at
> e09125febb2abd4d5eb70714ff68cdc76ee7dc45.
> 
> In the meantime what we can do is make a separate channel for openjfx.
> I use openjfx for davmail only, which does provide 2fa for Microsoft
> Exchange. I have been experiencing some font issues since the
> beginning and would be happy to try the finalized build you made.
> Thanks!
> 

Although I agree that maintainability of these packages is going to be
hard, I don't think it's so different from, say, maven :)

Using Gradle would be the best solution here, but unfortunately, it
depends at least on Kotlin for which there is currently no known
bootstrap path. I've ended up building a 0.10.something version in a
channel, but the next version I tried to build failed for unknown
reasons (I think the previous version miscompiles the last version I
could build). Even so, building from these old versions would require a
lot of intermediate versions before we reach a recent Kotlin and it'll
get worse everytime. I haven't found an alternative implementation we
could use either. I don't see Gradle coming to Guix soon unfortunately.

Using a separate channel wouldn't change the maintainability issue, and
it would make openjfx much less discoverable, so I don't think it's a
good solution.

We should simply add more documentation and make sure we explain what's
going on. It's difficult to follow, issues will be hard to fix, but I
think it's pretty similar to Maven, where each upgrade brings new
issues that are difficult to trace back to a cause and fix.

Previous Next

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