[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFC: JVM Registry

On Tue, Sep 11, 2001 at 02:35:41PM -0500, Ben Burton wrote:

My mail have not arrived to the list yet so I reply to this mail
instead. Because something just strucked me!

The problem I was talking about was that some packages can
provide and depend on specific jar packages, and maybe with
a specific version of that package.

So why not just "Provides: foo.jar, bar.jar" and then depend on the
jar files. What do you think about that? Yes we will have a lot of
"virtual packages" but this will also solve some issues.

We do now have the problem of versioning. But is it possible to
"Provide: foo.jar (= 1.2.3)".

If not that should be a great advantage.

The tool will just have to look at the package field and see what
it depends on, and add the apropriate jars to the classpath.
I can write such a tool and put it into java-common if you like. :)

With this alternative we almost have your repository, almost.


// Ola

 --------------------- 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: