Re: A packaging scheme...
>>>>> On Tue, 28 Sep 1999 22:27:51 -0500, "Ean R . Schuessler" <ean@novare.net> said:
Ean> On Tue, Sep 28, 1999 at 07:37:12PM -0400, James LewisMoss wrote:
>> What if I want to release a regex package under the lgpl. Should
>> I have to rename mine so that it doesn't conflict with gnu's?
>> This seems like it would place a large burden on different
>> organizations not to step on each others toes. So much that I
>> can't imagine anyone actually following it. I certainly don't
>> want to deal with conflicting with Joe Random java programmer's
>> gpled util.ByteTools with my own.
Ean> Right, but thats exactly what I'm talking about. It would be
Ean> convenient to have a consolidated system on the order of
Ean> libc. There are many packages that provide functionality that is
Ean> similar to libc but eventually those libraries are consolidated
Ean> into a single library that people can count on. This would be a
Ean> free software equivelent to the java base classes that is a
Ean> single managed and coordinated framework. The final product
Ean> should be similar in spirit to libc.
Hmm. So you envision a stdc type add on to the standard java.*
heirarchy... Put that way it's not such a bad idea. Course I don't
think it's polite to change someone else's code to fit into this
hierarchy. Where they put it in the package space is where it should
remain. (Not that you can't convince them that the org.gnu space is
good, but Debian shouldn't take it upon itself to change java packages
this way.) (IMO of course)
Dres
--
@James LewisMoss <dres@ioa.com> | Blessed Be!
@ http://www.ioa.com/~dres | Linux is kewl!
@"Argue for your limitations and sure enough, they're yours." Bach
Reply to: