Re: Packages that require Java 2 ?
On Tue, Sep 11, 2001 at 01:21:03PM +0200, Egon Willighagen wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 September 2001 13:11, Marcus Crafter wrote:
> > On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
> > > I tend to agree that the name java2-virtual-machine is a little
> > > misleading and perhaps silly (a remnant from when "virtual machine"
> > > was a hot buzzword). Perhaps something like java2-runtime?
> >
> > java2-runtime is fine with me. My only concern is that it differs from
> > the pre set standard java-virtual-machine.
> >
> > If we go ahead with java2-runtime I would advocate obsoleting
> > java-virtual-machine in favour of java(1?)-runtime for java1 packages.
> > I think it's important to keep things consistent.
>
> I agree. And since we are rather close to a freeze, a policy change does not
> sounds a good thing...
Well there are just a proposed policy yet... :)
> Can everyone approve with java2-virtual-machine for Woody and
> java[2]-runtime for Sid?
Well maybe we should do like this instead:
* Keep java-virtual-machine (for the virtual machine)
* Start using java1-runtime
* Start using java2-runtime
But there are not very lot of java packages in woody so it should be
possible to change it.
This makes it possible to keep the old style for some packages without
breaking things.
Regards,
// Ola
> Egon
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
--
--------------------- Ola Lundqvist ---------------------------
/ opal@debian.org Björnkärrsgatan 5 A.11 \
| opal@lysator.liu.se 584 36 LINKÖPING |
| +46 (0)13-17 69 83 +46 (0)70-332 1551 |
| http://www.opal.dhs.org UIN/icq: 4912500 |
\ gpg/f.p.: 7090 A92B 18FE 7994 0C36 4FE4 18A1 B1CF 0FE5 3DD9 /
---------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: