<p dir="ltr"><br>
On Feb 24, 2015 8:32 AM, "Mikolaj Izdebski" <<a href="mailto:mizdebsk@redhat.com">mizdebsk@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> On 02/24/2015 02:17 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:<br>
> >> I would much rather live without any legacy jdk, and if so then without any<br>
> >> rules. But not setting<br>
> >> them will bring chaos for majority of users.<br>
> ><br>
> > I have a question: Is there anybody that stepped in to maintain the legacy jdk?<br>
> > If there is nobody to maintain it trying to come up with this guidelines now would be pointless.<br>
> > In short I think that such guidelines would better be created *only* when there are interested parties, jointly with them and the process is played a bit by some copr repo or similar. Purely theoretical work is not needed.<br>
><br>
> I fully agree with Alex here.<br>
><br>
> I would add that if someone really wants to maintain older JDK in Fedora<br>
> then it should up to *them* to come up with a solution that will work<br>
> and satisfy expectations of JKD maintainers and Java SIG. Maintaining<br>
> package is more than clicking "unorphan" in pkgdb.<br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Mikolaj Izdebski<br>
> Software Engineer, Red Hat<br>
> IRC: mizdebsk<br>
> --<br>
></p>
<p dir="ltr">If some third party supplies 'java' as the $legacy jdk, and the user installs a Fedora package built on $current jdk, which provider will win, and what packages will break?</p>
<p dir="ltr">If the user uses alternatives to set the jdk (that applies here, right?) any applications that need one version or the other could break?</p>
<p dir="ltr">I understand these are relatively ignorant questions, but if the aim is to provide a path for someone to maintain older JDKs it seems better to offer them guidelines and best practices instead of "you'd better be competent enough to figure it out". They might not think of all the potential conflicts.</p>
<p dir="ltr">--Pete</p>