Re: [PROPOSAL] New Virtual Packages and way to handle Classpath
We must come to terms with the fact that a Debian Java policy cannot be
built with proprietary VMs in mind. There is no "make it work" when it
comes to proprietary software and Debian.
>From the Social Contract:
"We will support our users who develop and run non-free software on
Debian, but we will never make the system depend on an item of non-free
software."
Let's try to keep the discussion in that framework.
On Fri, 2003-08-29 at 16:44, Jan Schulz wrote:
> >I think we have a different perception of communities that free java
> >caters to: for you, it's mostly about making life easier for users of
> >java applications.
>
> Yes. IMO debian policy should go with this approach.
[SNIP]
> >I'm not quite sure what is debian's target audience.
>
> Seeing that debian is famous about 'that it works', I would say, that
> we should have a policy, which:
>
> * makes all our packages working with every JVM, which will run it:
> . free ones
> . unfree ones by a well defined API and a installer script
> * make all alternatives of java/javac working in the same way [1]
[SNIP]
> >No thanks, I prefer to root out the cause. ;)
>
> If you can. I'm more the 'make it work' guy...
[SNIP]
> >Yeah, but I don't really care about sun's java packages ;) If they
> >want to package their java for debian, fine. If they don't, I don't
> >understand why you're all so keen on doing it, instead of trying to
> >make the free alternatives better.
>
> Im of the 'whatever works best' group :) At least when I can't help
> myself to somthing better.
[SNIP]
> >I mean, this is debian, it's all about writing, using and promoting free
> >software, right? I'm not a debian developer, but that was my impression as an
> >innocent bystander.
>
> It's also about 'our users' and from that POV, we should react to the
> situation, that there are unfree java packages...
--
_____________________________________________________________________
Ean Schuessler ean@brainfood.com
Brainfood, Inc. http://www.brainfood.com
Reply to: