Subject: [Deb-dev] [Fwd: ffc_0.6.2-1_amd64.changes REJECTED]

From: "Johannes Ring" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 09:46:40 +0200

Hi,

FFC was unfortunately rejected into Debian. The problem is that the
python-ffc package depends on python-ufl but UFL was also rejected not
long ago (because of here.sty). I guess we need to wait for a new release
of UFL (without here.sty) and then upload UFL and FFC again. Another
approach may be to remove here.sty and repackage the original tarball.
What do you think Christophe?

Johannes

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: ffc_0.6.2-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
From:    "Joerg Jaspert" <[email-masked]>
Date:    Tue, August 18, 2009 00:27
To:      "Johannes Ring" <[email-masked]>
         "Debian Scientific Computing Team"
<[email-masked]>
         [email-masked]
Cc:      "Archive Administrator" <[email-masked]>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Maintainer,

rejected, this package needs python-ufl which doesnt seem to be in
Debian nor in NEW.

-- 
bye Joerg

===

Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why
your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our
concerns.

---

From: "Garth N. Wells" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 08:57:05 +0100

> What do you think Christophe?

Most of the FEniCS packages use here.sty. I removed it recently from DOLFIN.

here.sty is only included in the documentation source. Is it appropriate 
to have the documentation sources in the package or should we just have 
the pdf?

Garth

---

From: "Johannes Ring" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 10:02:06 +0200

> Most of the FEniCS packages use here.sty. I removed it recently from

Yes, and DOLFIN got into Debian with here.sty. I guess they missed it.

> to have the documentation sources in the package or should we just have

Debian requires the sources for pdf's as well. If a pdf comes without
sources then the pdf either has to be removed from the original tarball or
the package will be rejected.

Johannes

---

From: Anders Logg <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 10:15:30 +0200

> the package will be rejected.

I'll get started on removing here.sty from all the manuals right now.
I've been meaning to do it for some time but other things came in the way.

--
Anders

---

From: Anders Logg <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 11:16:50 +0200

> I've been meaning to do it for some time but other things came in the way.

I've removed here.sty from FFC, UFC and UFL. Garth has already removed
it for DOLFIN.

Feel free to "backport" these fixes to the current packages if you
like, or we could wait for the next release. It's about time we make a
release anyway.

I suggest we move these to 0.9.4:

  # Cleanup Function class logic, see [discussion] and [discussion]
  # Extracting vector field from tensor field, see [discussion]
  # Get all demos to run in parallel

To make a release, we then just need to fix the following:

  # Parsing of command-line arguments
  # Load parameters from file (might work, needs testing), perhaps search default directories for parameter file
  # Only set default argument values in header file of base class, not in subclasses, not in .cpp files

This are fairly easy to fix or are already working, just needing testing.

--
Anders

---

From: "Johannes Ring" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 11:38:00 +0200

> I've removed here.sty from FFC, UFC and UFL. Garth has already removed

Good.

> like, or we could wait for the next release. It's about time we make a

I could patch the UFL package and ask Christophe to upload, however, if a
release is coming soon I guess I rather wait for this.

Johannes