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

Re: policy proposal: java2 alternative



On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 01:19:01PM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> Package: java-common
> Version: 0.14
> 
> Ola Lundqvist <opal@debian.org> writes:
> 
> > As the policy maintainer I would like you to file this as a bug
> > to java-common too. It helps me to remember it.
> 
> Done. Going into minimal snipping mode due to that.

Thanks.

> > On Sun, Aug 04, 2002 at 11:54:08AM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> > > I'm sponsoring a (contrib) package that depends on
> > > java2-runtime. I (as a user of the package) will have to install the
> > > Blackdown VM to make it work, but I still want other java programs to
> > > use Kaffe because it's free. Pointing the "java" alternative to Kaffe
> > > will break the package, though ...
> > 
> > True. But if you already have installed the non-free version why use
> > the free one? Do you think it is better/faster or?
> 
> I want to avoid running non-free software as much as possible. As I
> said my only reason for installing java2-runtime was so I could
> sponsor a package. That does not mean I want to run it all the time

Well I use java2 too. :)

> due to Java daemon processes (which work with kaffe)! I guess at least
> some users are in a similar situation: they have java2 installed
> because something they can't avoid needs it, but want to use it only
> when absolutely necessary.
> 
> It's the same with, say, acroread and xpdf: I normally use the latter
> with all documents, and only if it can't render a document correctly,
> resort to the non-free alternative.
>  
> That was the "political" side. There is also technical reason: My
> freenet-unstable package is in main. I expect most of its users run it
> with kaffe. So to test it better, I want to use that, too, not some
> less-used alternative.

I understand.

> > > So I propose the following addition to java-policy: Providers of
> > > "java2-runtime" must also provide a "java2" alternative. Packages
> > > depending on "java2-runtime" can use this to be sure to get a
> > > java2-compliant environment. This allows for different defaults for
> > > java1 and java2 environments.
> > 
> > What do other people think about this solution?
> > 
> > > The same could apply to "java2-compiler" and "javac2", but I'm not
> > > sure if that is too useful (what *are* the differences between
> > > java1-compiler and java2-compiler, exactly?).
> > 
> > Well the java2* do not break as much. I have not find much other
> > differences.

Regards,

// Ola

> -- 
> Robbe
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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: