Re: [PROPOSAL] 3. RfD on new debian java policy
Hallo Jan,
--- Jan Schulz <jasc.usenet@gmx.de> wrote:
> * unfree interfaces are now 'additional to' the normal (free) debian
> packages, which provide a certain functionality
good.
> * java compilers are now use via ant, via an 'ant environment' or must
> be referenced directly (i.e. you need to Build-Depends: on jikes
> and not on java2-compiler)
better.
> * interfaces to unfree VM and ant environments are now named "unfree",
> at least in the policy.
still problematic to assume that sun-derived VMs are the only unfree VMs
around. someone could equally well write their own unfree licensed VM from
scratch, and want to package it for debian. despite being unfree, it wouldn't
necessarily have the same interface as sun-dervied VMs.
> * Packages should use a java.home like dir structure, for ants sake
> (see my other posting about how ant handles javadoc and java tasks)
let's try to get the upstream to fix ant first, before we make cement their
mistakes into a policy.
> * droped BOOTCLASSPATH and PROPERTIES
great!
> * added a chapter on 'building java package', which should make
> 'testing' with new VM easier.
nice.
> * deleted stuff, which seems "out of date" like the 'open questions',
> which are handled in the java FAQ.
good.
> 2.1. Java virtual machines and runtime environments
>
> Java virtual maschines and java runtimes environments are tightly
> linked, so it makes no sense to seperate them. Therefore only the java
> runtime environment is used to describe the command java.
>
> As it is nearly impossible to treat all java virtual maschines the
> same, JVMs are seperated into two kinds: sun compatible and not.
> Packages should access sun compatible java virtual maschiens via the
> described "unfree" interfaces below.
I think sun-derived, or JDK-derived is a better term, than sun-compatible. A VM
can be derived from Sun's sources without being compatible with the interfaces
you propose.
> 2.1.2. bin/java "unfree" interface
[snip]
> Priorities should be set as follows: highest spec/API version
> multiplied with 100 (1.4 -> 140), free VM may add 30 points, for
> incomplete spec/API compatibility subtract 40. Revisions may add 1
> point, as appropiate.
Uh, either the priorities system is poart of the unfree interface, then free
VMs don't care about it, and there is no need to mention them in the
description, or it's not, but then it's not clear what it's doing in this
section.
> 2.2.1. Ant Environment
>
> Packages, which can be used with ant to compile java code must setup
> a directory structure in /usr/lib/name (where name is the name of
> the corresponding virtual maschine (see above)), which includes
> bin/javadoc, which should be of the same API version as the virtual
> maschine, includes and includes/linux, with the JNI header files.
what is includes/linux good for? what files are expected there and what are
they used for?
> 2.6. Java programs
>
> Programs must depend on the needed runtime environments, including
> working versions if the bin/java unfree interfaces.
bzzt! ;)
this 'let's make free software in debian depend on non-free software' proposal
is incompatible with debian's goal, afaik. turn that into a 'may depend on the
unfree interfaces ' and I'll be happier with it.
In other news, I think the ant proposal is not that bad, I only hope we can get
rid of the JAVA_HOME stuff and get ant developers to fix their design issues.
cheers,
dalibor topic
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Reply to: