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

Re: [PROPOSAL] 3. RfD on new debian java policy

> Are there any other requirements? Should /lib and /usr/lib be searched
> or not for example?

The reason for the /usr/lib/jni addition to policy was to get JNI
modules out of /usr/lib directly (since they're dlopened modules, not
"normal" application libraries).

In particular, java policy also states that JNI modules should be placed
in /usr/lib/jni.  For this reason I'm not fussed if /lib and /usr/lib
are not included in this policy paragraph.

> Ant is used by some packages, but why mandate that ant must be used?

Eek, I missed this paragraph on first reading.  Hear hear.  Ant is not
always appropriate, e.g., when upstream ships with perfectly good

IMHO, it's fine for policy to dictate that a working java compiler/etc.
should be used.  But policy should not be forcing developers to use
specific development tools (such as ant).  Policy should exist to make
sure everything in debian works together, not to push developers into
one specific style of build (which may or may not be supported upstream).

To be more precise, policy should certainly support ant, but not to the
extent of dropping support for everything else.  Especially since ant
isn't even in main yet (though I understand this is very close now).

Ben. :)

Reply to: