Should the package name be forehead or libforehead-java?
Hi,
I'm trying to package forehead/libforehead-java but I'm not really
sure whether it should be considered as an app or a library. It's
needed for libcommons-jelly-java and for maven1 too.
I've found two sites: http://forehead.werken.com/ and
http://forehead.sourceforge.net/ as sources for forehead. I first
tried the werken site to see if the sources were there. I wasn't able
to access the cvs repo and it seems like it has already been removed
(it's not in the project list and cvs.werken.com redirects to
cvs.codehaus.org). So I tried searching the net and got the SF site
and found the sources there. I've checked out the sources and have
already managed to build the app without maven even though it's
maven-based and the included ant build file was no good.
Now, I've got the app building on pbuilder and no lintian/linda
errors, except for the included CVS dirs in the orig tarball. My only
problem is whether to consider forehead as an app or a library. I've
looked at its usage page[1] and it doesn't really look like "normal"
app usage to me so I tend to look at forehead as a library. I've also
checked commons-jelly to see where it uses it and found that it's
needed for the startup script:
$JAVA_HOME/bin/java -classpath ${CLASSPATH} \
-Dforehead.conf.file=${FOREHEAD_CONF} \
-Djelly.home=${JELLY_HOME} \
-Dtools.jar=${JAVA_HOME}/lib/tools.jar \
${JELLY_OPTS} \
com.werken.forehead.Forehead "$@"
I'm requesting for your view on this. Should forehead be considered an
app or a library? The package is nearly ready as libforehead-java but
if it should really be forehead, I'll still need to provide a script
for /usr/bin and a manual page.
Thanks in advance.
[1] http://forehead.sourceforge.net/usage.html
--
GPG Key ID: 0xD6655C18
Linux Just Simply Rocks!
http://deathwing.penarmac.com/
Reply to: