Re: GNUstep on Hackernews

[Daniel Boyd]

Given these constraints, seems like a GNUStep-maintained apt repository is the 
answer, right? If you want the GCC packages, you can get them from Debian. If 
you want libobjc2/clang packages, you install the GNUStep apt repository.

I remember seeing the idea of an apt repository discussed awhile back. Is that 
still in the works? It would make deploying apps in my company a bit easier. 
I’ve got a script that clones all the code from github and compiles everything, 
but that does take a bit and would be nice for updates to be pushed out via apt.

> 
> On Dec 28, 2021, at 5:13 PM, Yavor Doganov <yavor@gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 22:54:32 +0200,
> Ivan Vučica wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 9:34 AM Andreas Fink <afink@list.fink.org> wrote:
>>> packages in Debian are quite old
>> 
>> Inaccurate.
> 
> It is both accurate and inaccurate.  More precisely, at times it is
> accurate and at times it is inaccurate; it also depends what Debian
> release you use for comparison.  It is inevitable that a stable
> release at some point starts qualifiying as one one with "old" or even
> "quite old" packages, even with best of our effort.
> 
>> At release times, I usually try to coordinate with Debian packagers.
>> This time, it took a bit longer, but uploads happened in November and
>> December.
> 
> This is my personal fault; I failed to coordinate with you and inform
> in advance about Debian's release schedule so the current GNUstep core
> releases happened at a time we couldn't include them in the current
> Debian stable release (bullseye).  Then I was waiting for my sponsor
> for more than 6 months for the upload of gnustep-make and subsequently
> current GNUstep releases were introduced in Debian unstable with a
> great delay.
> 
>>> and don't support objc2.0.
>> 
>> The issue here is Debian preferring to build things with GCC over
>> Clang.
> 
> I'm quite certain that I've explained at least once in great detail
> why this is so, on this list.  As there are still questions popping up
> here and there, I intend to write a specific chapter regarding this
> subject in the not-yet-finished Debian GNUstep team policy document.
> It will be installable as a Debian package and the repository will be
> public, like almost everything in Debian.
> 
>> If we can convince the (very kind in their efforts) maintainers of
>> the packaging to try to package with Clang and libobjc2, we'd be
>> golden.
> 
> The thing is, Debian is no longer a distro where a member of the
> project can upload its pet package and keep it under custody until he
> is formally declared maintainer.  Packages are being aggressively
> removed nowadays, on the grounds of being obsolete, unpopular,
> unmaintained, or with unresponsive upstream.  We fought hard with the
> Debian stweards some 15 years ago for GNUstep to remain and I foresee
> more battles on the horizon.
> 
> The automatic reaction of these people is to "get rid" and that's
> natural.  From a Debian ftpmaster POV, a change which requires plenty
> of manual action + coordination between teams and does not bring any
> real benefit to the current packages is a poor change.
> 
>> I believe Yavor and Gurkan are subscribed to (some of) GNUstep
>> mailing lists.
> 
> FWIW, I'm reading all GNUstep lists + (Savannah) bug traffic +
> (GitHub) commit notifications + GAP + (not sure) gnustep-nonfsf.  I'm
> only subscribed to some of them though, the bulk of it I follow via
> Usenet (Gmane), sometimes with delay.
> 
>