[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Clear definition of default-java and its scope



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Hi

In light of LP: #687263 and LP: #564699 I think it might be time for us
to clearly define the purpose of default-java; not only for our own sake
but also for the sake of Java users on Debian(-based distros).

Note that by "default-java" I here refer to the symlink
/usr/lib/jvm/default-java and also the default-jre{,-headless},
default-jdk packages.

The current definition of default-java seems to be:
 - The default Java used for building Debian packages (based on how we
   use it)
 - The best free/open Java available on the platform (based on how we
   "choose" the default-java on a given architecture).

Users, who do not work on Debian packages, will most likely not come to
the same conclusions, since they are not involved in Debian Java
Development.
  Particularly in the LP: #687263 case, a user expected "default-java"
to be controlled by alternatives. I assume he/she read "default" as
"system-default" and personally I found that a very valid assumption
(from a user perspective).

I propose we solve this by explicitly defining default-java to hold the
two definitions I mentioned above (it is the only sane choice for
backwards compatibility as far as I can tell) and post-Squeeze introduce
a "system-default-java", which is an alternative-controlled Java. For
Squeeze I would settle with updating the Java FAQ[1].
  This solution will not directly solve LP: #687263[2], but it will
solve LP: #564699 and also a part of LP: #45348 by allowing users to set
JAVA_HOME to the system-default-java and now update-alternatives will
automatically update their JAVA_HOME as well.

~Niels

[1] http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/

[2] The issue is actually about the tool not preferring chosen
alternative (if valid) above other choices.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=b5FK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Reply to: