Re: Debian Java outlook
On Friday 10 September 1999, at 10 h 50, the keyboard of Jim Franklin
<jfranklin@etworld.com> wrote:
> Perhaps the question of a "Debian Java Policy" might be handled as
> part of the creation of a nonexistent non-profit debian-java
> fellowship/organization/sub-debian_organization.
Well, this is quite far-fetched. May be smaller goals first?
> )take an inventory of what you have at this moment -businesses that
> don't occasionally take inventory usually go bankrupt. The inventory
> should include people/members and product(packages).
Jules Bean suggested to do such a list but gave in, by lack of free time.
Volunteers are welcome.
> )create a "Debian Java Policy" -policies by nature are usually
> restrictive, and should be kept as small as possible.
We are working on it. See the java-common package. I agree it is a good thing
for it to be small: some issues ae clearly unresolved (core classes...) and
are therefore left out.
It is always possible that someone is stupid enough to mock the proposed
policy from its size ("All this time for a page and a half!") but we'll ignore
him.
> An example of
> policy would be "Packages must adhere to the GPL to be included in
> main."
On this specific point, there is nothing related with Java. Policy (Debian
general policy, not Java policy) just say you have to be DFSG-free to get into
main, wether you are written in Java, Ruby or Scheme.
> )public relations and customer relations -without PR there won't be an
> influx of new debian-java developers and I have heard complaints on the
> mailing list that there aren't enough developers at java-debian. PR can
> be as simple as the statement "debian-java rocks"
At the present time, it is false. debian-java more or less sucks. Until we (note the plural) change it, I will not write a Press Release "Debian is the best Java platform". I abide by the social contract and I am therefore entitled to realism, modesty and telling the truth to the users.
Reply to: