Re: [PROPOSAL] New Virtual Packages and way to handle Classpath
Hallo Jan,
--- Jan Schulz <jasc.usenet@gmx.de> wrote:
> Hallo Dalibor,
>
> * Dalibor Topic wrote:
> >> I wanted to say, that you have a interface for the 'unfree' ones and
> >> this interface will work, even if you have 'not working' JVM
> >> installed. The current interface (/usr/bin/java) does not garantee,
> >> that your package is working.
> >I don't think that an 'interface' can guarantee that a package is working
> with
> >a specific VM environment. Only testing by the ?ackagers and users can
> >guarantee that.
>
> Yes. I agree with that for the 'free' alternatives. IMO the 'unfree'
> ones don't need that much testing, as they can changed without a
> problem. At least as far as I have experienced it.
I don't have much experience using the non-free ones, so I can't really comment
on that. But I'd doubt that all of the non-free VMs use exactly the same code,
as there would be little benefit in having three times the same thing with a
different brand name slapped across it. If they don't have the same code, then
I think it contradicts the idea of debian packages working well out of the box,
if the packager only assumes that a package should work with some VM, but
doesn't test it prior to release, no matter if they have the same interface or
not, as their internals are different. It's the difference between 'it should
work' and 'it works' and my impression is that you want debian's java package
to be in the second category, a goal which I fully support.
A packager on some debian-linux platform without a port of non-free VMs would
be misleading his users if he claimed that his package works with a non-free VM
without having tested the package with the VM in question. I think the policy
should encourage maintainers to be honest about the status of their packages.
> >>From debian I'd expect a policy that helps and guides java apps/libs/jvm
> >maintainers to build and package their stuff with a focus on free VMs, gives
> >pointers who to get in topuch with if things don't work, has a section on
> free
> >java developers working on providing a free java infrastructure and how to
> >contribute to it, and provides the necessary bits of information on how to
> >deal with the legacy, proprietary VMs. Certainly not the other way round ;)
>
> This is not the primary goal of the policy IMO. The policy is for
> describing *how* a package should look like, a kind of ruleset, which
> packages have to comply to. Nothing more, nothing less.
Well, the current proposal for a debian java policy contains some issues to
discuss, and an advice for packagers section. I think that's a good idea, as it
could help new packagers with their task. If you think it would be better to
put such things into the debian java faq, fair enough. Thogh I would hope that
the policy actively encourages packagers to support free VMs, in accordance
with debian's free software goals.
cheers,
dalibor topic
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Reply to: