On 03.09.2013 23:30, Nathan Kinder wrote: > On 09/01/2013 01:35 PM, Timo Aaltonen wrote: >> On 01.09.2013 21:43, Dmitri Pal wrote: >>> On 09/01/2013 02:20 PM, Timo Aaltonen wrote: >>>> On 31.08.2013 00:04, Dmitri Pal wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> Sorry for cross posting to 4 different lists but it seems that this is >>>>> the best way to include most of people who might be interested in this >>>>> discussion. >>>>> >>>>> The question of "When FreeIPA will be available on Debian?" has been >>>>> coming up periodically on the list(s) without any resolution. >>>>> However it >>>>> is clear that it would be beneficial for the community and the >>>>> project. >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> As you know, I've been packaging stuff for the past two years with the >>>> goal of eventually having FreeIPA server on Debian/Ubuntu. A lot has >>>> been accomplished, but quite a bit is still missing too.. >>>> >>>>> May be it is time to try again? >>>>> Let us see why it yet has not happened? >>>>> >>>>> 1) Some components need to be ported to Debian especially Dogtag and a >>>>> slew of its new RESTEasy dependencies. This requires time and quite an >>>>> effort from someone familiar with the domain. >>>> Yes, this is the biggest blocker. Dogtag 9 is packaged in git and >>>> working, but I'm not going to push that to the distro. It can be used >>>> for testing the IPA server though, before we have Dogtag 10. Once the >>>> prereqs are in place the Dogtag git should be easy to rebase with 10.x. >>>> >>>> I did start packaging some of the dependencies, but hit a wall when >>>> some >>>> maven component needed a different release than another one.. AIUI this >>>> is a known issue with maven based projects.. > I would like to organize the effort to get Dogtag 10 ported to Debian. > I know that there are a lot of dependencies needed for this to happen. > I can create and maintain a wiki page to track all of the work that is > needed to get this porting done. Do you have a list of Dogtag 10 > dependencies that are not currently packaged for Debian that I can use > as a starting point? Once we have a clear outline of what is needed, we > can start trying to divide up and schedule the work. Alright, nice! This is the list I sent to debian-java a year ago, roughly in dependency order:

codehaus-parent keytool-maven-plugin maven-help-plugin maven-idea-plugin maven-jarsigner-plugin maven-jxr maven-source-plugin geronimo-parent-poms geronimo-annotation plexus-mail-sender maven-release plexus-resources maven-checkstyle-plugin maven-pmd-plugin maven-anno-plugin maven-reporting-api maven-changes-plugin maven-deploy-plugin apache-james-project javamail base64coder gdata-java sonatype-oss-parent forge-parent mojo-parent maven-plugin-build-helper relaxngcc xsom glassfish-fastinfoset jvnet-parent glassfish-jaxb-api glassfish-dtd-parser stax-ex istack-commons rngom glassfish-jaxb maven-jaxb2-plugin jboss-parent jandex jboss-specs-parent jboss-annotations jetty-parent jetty-toolchain jetty-version-maven-plugin scannotation snakeyml resteasy There might be errors, now that I know that the fedora package of resteasy doesn't built everything to make the deps a bit easier?

And at least codehaus-parent, mojo-parent and jetty-parent are packaged and pushed to git.debian.org but since I'm not a DD (yet) I can't upload them. The debian java policy means that the actual package names are like 'libmojo-parent-java' etc., in case you try to find a package. > Do you have more details on the maven issue you were running up against? if my notes are to be trusted, it was that keytool-maven-plugin wants v16 of mojo-parent, and not v30 that is in git now..