Re: Apache Commons packaging question
Hi Manuel,
Manuel Prinz said:
> Hi all,
>
> I thought about packaging the Apache Commons Math Library[1] which I use
> regularly. I do have a some question though and would like to ask you
> for your opinion on that:
>
> 1. Other commons source packages seem to be renamed to libcommon-*-java.
> Do all commons packages do this? Is there a kind of agreement on this?
Yes. the lib*-java part is given by the Java Policy [2], the rest is more
of a "common" understanding.
>
> 2. The commons-math tarball ships three jars containing the class files,
> source files and documentation, respectively. Is it OK to just put them
> in the Debian package (as they are) or should I extract the source and
> rebuild a Debian source package from that? (The tarball is 4.5 MB large,
> extracted sources are 2.3 MB, tarred+gzipped 270 KB.)
Everything which is generated needs to be generated from source as part of
the package build. As if you need to repackage the sources, it's yes if
some is not distributable, and it's at your judgement if you spare a lot
of space. In your case, I would repackage the source. See [3] for more
details.
>
> 3. Is the above case known from other commons libraries? I'd be thankful
> for a pointer to a package that I could have a look at.
Can't answer. Once the upstream sources are repackaged, you can use any
package as a basis for your work.
>
> Or is there no need for this library at all?
If you're willing to package and maintain it, there is a need :-) (but *I*
don't need it). You can check [4].
Eric
>
> Best regards
> Manuel
>
> [1] http://commons.apache.org/math/
>
>
[2] http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/java-policy/x105.html
[3]
http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-best-pkging-practices.en.html#s-bpp-origtargz
[4] http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/
--
Eric de France, d'Allemagne et de Navarre
Reply to: