Re: Bug#522996: ITP: jruby1.2 -- 100% pure-Java implementation of Ruby
On Wed, 8 Apr 2009 05:10:12 pm Romain Beauxis wrote:
> Le Tuesday 07 April 2009 22:59:00 Sebastien Delafond, vous avez écrit :
> > On Apr/07, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > While I see why it can be needed for python, I fail to see how it is
> > > important for jruby...
> >
> > to have 2 versions of jruby available ? I guess so you can at least, for
> > instance, try the new one on your existing jruby code without removing
> > the old one, for instance ?
>
> If we were to apply this policy to all software packaged in debian, that
> would be a mess.
It would be a security mess as well, I don't particularly want to fix the same
issue in 2-4 packages ...
> > Are you advocating for only one instance of jruby at all times in the
> > archive ? If so, why ?
>
> I think this is the other way round: by default there should be only one
> version per package -- after all that is why we have package name and
> package version..
>
> Hence, it should be explained why multiple version of the same package are
> relevant for Debian and its users. And I don't think that "testing several
> versions" is a good explanation..
If a dozen (or more) packages really need the older version, then it could be
discussed I guess (some details here would be nice). But I agree that having
it around for "testing" reasons is not a valid reason.
Cheers
Steffen
Reply to: