Re: RFS: commons-jci [2nd try]
[dropping mentors, this is bound to bore them, I guess]
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:34 PM, Damien Raude-Morvan
> Because, AFAIK, nobody answer to my initial request email (back in September
> 2008) :) But, I'm really happy to be part of pkg-java now and will move this
> package (and maybe others too) to it.
> This lead me to 2 questions :
> - Is there some sort of policy which define good/bad candidates for pkg-java
> usage ? part of Apache Commons is a MUST ? being a framework too ? forbidden
> to contrib/non-free ?
There are no specific rules I'm aware of - except the implicit one
that it's got to be java-related ;-)...
> - And BTW, I was looking for pkg-java SVN repository layout and usage
> guidelines at java.debian.net and wiki.debian.org and can't found any up-to-
> date documentation (just ). Do you have some links to share ?
For me, http://wiki.debian.org/Java/JavaSvn says it all. But if that
isn't enough for you, please ask and we'll come up with a decent
update of that page.
>> * Why do you build-dep on openjdk but depends on
>> java-gcj-compat-headless ? If it runs with java-gcj, it should build
>> with java-gcj. I don't think we have (yet) a policy on that, but if it
>> builds with java-gcj, you really should consider building with it, as it
>> makes a lower requirement of Java runtime (unless you tweak the build
>> options for openjdk), and it is available on many more architectures.
> As you may have seen one of the binary-package (libcommons-jci-jsr199-java) is
> currently disabled but need >= 6.x Java API (i.e. JSR199 got included in Java
> 6 release).
> This is why I use OpenJDK6 and tend to prefer to keep it as prefered B-D JDK.
>> * I'd personally prefer an upload to experimental... (during the freeze).
> This debate already took place last December  ;)
> I'll update target release to experimental after playing with pkg-java SVN
I'll have a look tomorrow (don't have my GPG keys today).
> [PS : No need to CC me, I'm subscribed to debian -java && -mentors]