Bug#365408: [POLICY-PROPOSAL] Drop java*-runtime/compiler, create classpath-jre/jdk and java-jre/jdk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Charles Fry wrote:
>>Note that I added a paragraph from a proposal from Stefan Gybas,
>>modified by Ben Burton (see Bug#227587). Even if they did not really get
>>a consensus, I think, with the change of the virtual packages to
>>classpath-jre, classpath-jdk, java-jre and java-jdk, the proposal of
>>Stefan is good to integrate in our policy.
>
> I strongly oppose the classpath/java distinction for classpath vs.
> non-free JREs and JDKs. Instead I propose dropping classpath-* as well,
> and only using java-jre and java-jdk.
So people that wants to use Java should install non-free software?
That's not possible in Debian!
> Maybe I just have never seen a place where the distinction would be
> useful, but in my mind it widens the gap between free and non-free Java
> implementations. An ideal Debian world should, it seems, define JRE and
> JDK virtual packages in a way that works for free implementations, and
> can then be used for non-free implementations.
You are right but it's not the actual reality. When free vm's will be
100% compatible with non-free ones, maybe we'll be able to drop the
classpath-* virtual packages, but keep in mind that Java is a trademark
of Sun Microsystems and in the license of Java, we couldn't replace a
tool from the jdk with another with the same functionality!
I'm not sure Sun Microsystems'd like the idea of our virtual java-*
packages to be provided by free vm's! I'm really not sure this is legal!
Maybe you have another proposal (I mean a legal one ;-))
Cheers,
- --
.''`.
: :' :rnaud
`. `'
`-
Java Trap: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFEYzPv4vzFZu62tMIRAkJiAJ0UqIbvQLhD96ulbQGJYD7M4VH7cgCgqpe3
71q5UXeiX+J7VfJ1VWKeSbc=
=WfGe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: