Debian Bug report logs - #165504
ITA: junit-freenet -- basic reimplementation of the JUnit

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Robert Millan <zeratul2@wanadoo.es>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: O: junit-freenet

Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 14:36:42 +0200

Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2002-10-18
Severity: normal

i don't have time to maintain this package anymore.

junit-freenet is the only replacement of Junit we have
in main, and may be used by the freenet package for
some internal checks (Robert Bihlmeyer doesn't have time
to maintain junit-f either)

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux aragorn 2.2.21 #1 Thu Aug 8 13:53:32 CEST 2002 i586
Locale: LANG=ca_ES.ISO-8859-1, LC_CTYPE=ca_ES@euro (ignored: LC_ALL set)

Message #12 received at 165504@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Stefan Gybas <sgybas@provective.de>

To: 165504@bugs.debian.org

Subject: ITA: junit-freenet -- basic reimplementation of the JUnit unit testing framework

Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 11:31:08 +0200

retitle 165504 ITA: junit-freenet -- basic reimplementation of the JUnit 
unit testing framework
thanks

I'll "adopt" this package. However, I won't upload a new package, I've 
asked for its removal instead (#200949). If that's not the proper 
procedure, I can upload a new package with changed maintainter first, 
but I think I can save the time and ask for the removal of other useless 
Java packages instead. ;-)

I never understood why this was packaged...

Stefan

Message #19 received at 165504-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Stefan Gybas <sgybas@provective.de>

To: 165504-done@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: ITA: junit-freenet -- basic reimplementation of the JUnit

Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 22:14:24 +0200

junit-freenet has been removed from unstable.

Message #24 received at 165504@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Robert Millan <zeratul2@wanadoo.es>

To: 165504@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Stefan Gybas <sgybas@provective.de>, debian-java@lists.debian.org, pkg-java-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org, junit@packages.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#165504 acknowledged by developer (Re: ITA: junit-freenet -- basic reimplementation of the JUnit)

Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 18:36:44 +0200

On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 03:33:09PM -0500, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
> #165504: ITA: junit-freenet -- basic reimplementation of the JUnit,
> which was filed against the wnpp package.
> 
> It has been closed by one of the developers, namely
> Stefan Gybas <sgybas@provective.de>.

That's not nice. I didn't orphan junit-freenet so that someone would
remove it from debian without even asking me about it.

Now you decided we shouldn't have any junit implementation in main; or
will you convince the IBM's junit maintainer to move his package, which
is currently in contrib?

-- 
Robert Millan

Message #29 received at 165504@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Steve Langasek <vorlon@netexpress.net>

To: Robert Millan <zeratul2@wanadoo.es>, 165504@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Stefan Gybas <sgybas@provective.de>, debian-java@lists.debian.org, pkg-java-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org, junit@packages.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#165504: acknowledged by developer (Re: ITA: junit-freenet -- basic reimplementation of the JUnit)

Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 12:03:25 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 06:36:44PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 03:33:09PM -0500, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> > This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
> > #165504: ITA: junit-freenet -- basic reimplementation of the JUnit,
> > which was filed against the wnpp package.

> > It has been closed by one of the developers, namely
> > Stefan Gybas <sgybas@provective.de>.

> That's not nice. I didn't orphan junit-freenet so that someone would
> remove it from debian without even asking me about it.

But orphaning means that you no longer wish to take responsibility for
the package.  Perhaps you wanted to RFA instead?

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #34 received at 165504@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Robert Millan <zeratul2@wanadoo.es>

To: Steve Langasek <vorlon@netexpress.net>

Cc: 165504@bugs.debian.org, Stefan Gybas <sgybas@provective.de>, debian-java@lists.debian.org, pkg-java-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org, junit@packages.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#165504: acknowledged by developer (Re: ITA: junit-freenet -- basic reimplementation of the JUnit)

Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 19:32:16 +0200

On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 12:03:25PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 06:36:44PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> 
> > That's not nice. I didn't orphan junit-freenet so that someone would
> > remove it from debian without even asking me about it.
> 
> But orphaning means that you no longer wish to take responsibility for
> the package.  Perhaps you wanted to RFA instead?

No, I wanted to orphan because I was unable (due to lack of time) to
take responsability for this package. Which is different than not being
interested on junit-freenet. If i didn't have any interest on it, I could have
requested its removal myself.

I think we should have a junit implementation in main; IBM's junit is
preferred, but after a long (and useless) discussion with its maintainer to
convince him of moving junit into main I opted for packaging junit-freenet.

If the junit maintainer agrees to drop junit's arbitrary dependencies on
non-free components, then we'll have this problem solved. Otherwise someone
will have to ITP junit-freenet again (and it seems that someone will have to
be me.. *sigh*)

Stefan, now that you bring all this trouble to me it'd be nice if you did
something to fix it; like, for example, trying to convince junit's maintainer.

-- 
Robert Millan

Message #39 received at 165504@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Stefan Gybas <sgybas@provective.de>

To: debian-java@lists.debian.org

Cc: 165504@bugs.debian.org

Subject: junit-freenet, was Re: Bug#165504 acknowledged by developer

Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 20:23:30 +0200

[No need to CC a lot of lists, everybody involved is reading 
debian-java. I got your mail 3 times!]

Robert Millan wrote:

> Now you decided we shouldn't have any junit implementation in main; or

No, I did not. junit's dependecies are:

Package: junit
Section: contrib/devel
Version: 3.8.1-3
Depends: kaffe | java-virtual-machine

So it does not depend on any packages outside of main. It is in contrib 
because it does not work with any of the currently packaged JVMs in 
main. From the Java policy, section 2.5:

---
If your binary package can run only with non-free virtual machines 
(classpath has a list of free versions), it cannot go to main. If your 
package itself is free, it must go to contrib.
---

Why should junit-freenet run with packaged free JVMs when junit does not?

BTW, there's no reason for junit-freenet to exist any longer since 
freenet has also been removed (see #198449).

> will you convince the IBM's junit maintainer to move his package, which
> is currently in contrib?

Yes, that's the plan. It will move to main as soon as it can be run with 
a JVM in main. You can speed this up by helping the Kaffe or SableVM 
maintainers.

If you think you need to package junit-freenet again, go ahead (but 
don't orphan it again). I rather spend my time getting Ant and other 
packages into main than discussing this any longer.

Stefan

Message #44 received at 165504@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Takashi Okamoto <toraneko@kun.ne.jp>

To: debian-java@lists.debian.org, 165504@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: junit-freenet, was Re: Bug#165504 acknowledged by developer

Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2003 08:23:22 +0900 (JST)

From: Stefan Gybas <sgybas@provective.de>
Subject: junit-freenet, was Re: Bug#165504 acknowledged by developer
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 20:23:30 +0200
> Package: junit
> Section: contrib/devel
> Version: 3.8.1-3
> Depends: kaffe | java-virtual-machine
> 
> So it does not depend on any packages outside of main. It is in contrib 
> because it does not work with any of the currently packaged JVMs in 
> main. From the Java policy, section 2.5:

In the fact, junit works with kaffe. But junit use swing which prevent
from compiling with free jvm, so junit is gone to contrib. I can write
swing ui wrapper which provide junit.swingui.TestRunner class but use
awt instead of swing. How about this idea? The wrapper class may
provide poor gui than original swing ui but we can put junit into
main.

> I rather spend my time getting Ant and other packages into main than
> discussing this any longer.

Sorry not sooner reply. I maint junit and it's my responsibility.

Takashi Okamoto	 

Message #49 received at 165504@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "E.L. Willighagen (Egon)" <egonw@sci.kun.nl>

To: Takashi Okamoto <toraneko@kun.ne.jp>, debian-java@lists.debian.org, 165504@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: junit-freenet, was Re: Bug#165504 acknowledged by developer

Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 20:26:05 +0200

On Saturday 19 July 2003 01:23, Takashi Okamoto wrote:
> From: Stefan Gybas <sgybas@provective.de>
> Subject: junit-freenet, was Re: Bug#165504 acknowledged by developer
> Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 20:23:30 +0200
> >
> > So it does not depend on any packages outside of main. It is in contrib
> > because it does not work with any of the currently packaged JVMs in
> > main. From the Java policy, section 2.5:
>
> In the fact, junit works with kaffe. But junit use swing which prevent
> from compiling with free jvm, so junit is gone to contrib. I can write
> swing ui wrapper which provide junit.swingui.TestRunner class but use
> awt instead of swing. How about this idea? The wrapper class may
> provide poor gui than original swing ui but we can put junit into
> main.

What about making a patch that just removes all the Swing dependent
stuff? Or, split the package up in a non-swing and a swing part...
Though your option would be nicer, but could take more time? Have
you considered a SWT drop in? Ah, no, just checked libswt-java is in contrib 
too... so, that won't help...

> > I rather spend my time getting Ant and other packages into main than
> > discussing this any longer.
>
> Sorry not sooner reply. I maint junit and it's my responsibility.

Egon

Message #54 received at 165504@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Takashi Okamoto <toraneko@kun.ne.jp>

To: debian-java@lists.debian.org, 165504@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: junit-freenet, was Re: Bug#165504 acknowledged by developer

Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2003 06:04:39 +0900 (JST)

From: "E.L. Willighagen (Egon)" <egonw@sci.kun.nl>
Subject: Re: junit-freenet, was Re: Bug#165504 acknowledged by developer
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 20:26:05 +0200
> > from compiling with free jvm, so junit is gone to contrib. I can write
> > swing ui wrapper which provide junit.swingui.TestRunner class but use
> > awt instead of swing. How about this idea? The wrapper class may
> > provide poor gui than original swing ui but we can put junit into
> > main.
> 
> What about making a patch that just removes all the Swing dependent
> stuff? Or, split the package up in a non-swing and a swing part...

This is all tough it may not so nice...

[junit/swingui/TestRunner.java]

package junit.swingui;

public class TestRunner extends BaseTestRunner implements TestRunContext {
  public static void main(String[] args) {
    new junit.awtui.TestRunner().start(args) ;
  }
}


Takashi Okamoto

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.