Explaining the exclusion of legacy/pom.xml.

@egonw-guest would it be possible to upgrade jgrapht from v0.6.0 to v0.8.0 painlessly? Artifact legacy could be salvaged by this.

I have it on my radar now. I will try.

PS1: now, legacy is legacy for a reason, so it's not that important.

PS2: I will also look at updating the Apache Jena stack, if that is packaged in Debian.

PS1: now, legacy is legacy for a reason, so it's not that important.

Good then.

PS2: I will also look at updating the Apache Jena stack, if that is packaged in Debian.

It seems that Apache Jena is not yet packaged.

Actually, turns out to be hard. JGraphT 0.8 is not readily available on Maven Central. 0.7 is and 0.9 is, but 0.8 is not :(

I tried updating to 0.9.2 but that comes with significant API changes in the library.

Upgrading to 0.7 has the same API change. Not an easy update.

I see. Actually, JGraphT 0.6 could be fixed in Debian to include Maven layout. It shouldn't be a lot of work.

I was wrong. I can't find pom.xml for JGraphT 0.6, and I can't produce Maven layout without it. So let's probably exclude legacy for now.

Agreed. It may be realize too that we do want legacy at some point. The Ullman algorithm may be outdated, but the CDK has a longstanding history of providing implementation of "classics" too. The biggest issue with the upgrade is the Edge no longer exists and is replaced by a generics approach. That should be solvable. But likely not before x-mas. So, going without legacy sounds good to me.

PS. the previous version also still have manpages for command line tools. I'll set up a project to recreate those CLIs. (Also for later, don't wait for that :)

Great, thanks. I am now waiting for the CDK's build dependencies to be accepted into Debian. The progress could be tracked in #635182.