Re: [PROPOSAL] 3. RfD on new debian java policy
> >I'm quite happy with this suggestion as well (must -> may for non-free
> >JVM dependencies). If at least one of the dependencies is satisfied
> >- even if this is selected from a list of only free JVMs - then the
> >app will presumably run successfully and so there's no problem if
> >non-free JVMs are omitted from this dependency list.
>
> Sorry, I'm not doing this. If a package can be used with unfree VM,
> then this package 'should' also include this VM in the search path.
>
> If you talk about the 'choice of the user', then there should also be
> a choice to run on a unfree VM. Debian is not about *forcing* the user
> to use free software.
Nobody's forcing the user to do anything. I'm presuming that the app
startup scripts will allow a user to specify their own JVM with which to
run an app (and I wouldn't mind putting *that* requirement in policy).
By doing this, users can run an app under whatever JVM they like. It's
just a matter of the dependency system requiring them to install one of
the "officially supported" JVMs, whether or not they choose to use it in
the end.
I honestly do not think you're going to be able to force package
maintainers to install non-free software on their systems for testing
their DFSG-free apps. Some of these non-free packages have
eyebrow-raising clauses in their licenses, and I won't blame some
maintainers for refusing to test with them.
Ben.
Reply to: