Re: ant dependency on jython and antlr
> I think the dependency on junit sort of makes sense since it can be
> considered a basic tool for java developers. The same cannot be said of
> jython and antlr.
On the other hand, having jython depend on (or recommend or suggest) ant
is quite nonsensical as well, since ant is not really a tool for script
writers - in fact jython is not enhanced by ant at all. The relationship
works the other way around: jython enhances the functionality of ant.
So from a purely semantic point of view it seems that ant should provide
the suggests/recommends/depends.
> I'm fine with ant Depends junit, but not jython or antlr. Ant could
> Build-depend on them, of course.
Indeed there is no problem with ant build-depending on lots and lots of
stuff. This will not affect the everyday user, who'll just be
installing it.
As for dangling symlinks, I'd be inclined to say don't worry about it.
I have this situation in one of my own packages: kdbg provides a symlink
to the KDE common directory for each of its translated languages. So
(for instance) if kde-i18n-fr is not installed then kdbg has a dangling
symlink. I can't possibly require every user to install the (very
large) kde-i18n packages for each language that the kdbg docs are
translated into. It's also not feasible for kde-i18n-fr to provide this
symlink for every app that has French translations (for instance). So
the symlink is just left dangling, and if a user is reading the French
docs then they almost certainly have kde-i18n-fr installed so there is
not actually a problem.
> >Anyway, the more I have to do with java packaging, the more braindead
> >it seems to me...
>
> Now, don't be pessimistic! There _has_ to be a way to do things right ;-)
hehe.. I must say I also reached Jan's state of mind some time ago. :)
b.
Reply to: