Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
On Mon, 2008-03-03 at 10:06 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> The 'problem' with java packages is that the packaging guidelines have
> largely been defined outside Fedora (since part of the platform was
> historicaly closed), and there's been a drive to rewrite history and
> start from scratch instead of trying to work with the original third
> party repository to update those rules (if needed).
Really, the problem is this:
1. No one has proposed any serious Java packaging guidelines for Fedora.
If someone were to take the JPackage guidelines and propose them as the
Fedora packaging guidelines, it would be a start at least, right now,
we've got nothing.
Well, we have:
But I must agree that that still needs some work. And there also is:
But thats seems somewhat incomplete too.
2. The Java packages that we have currently are rather inconsistent
how they package, and many of them are badly bitrotted for a variety of
reasons, so we can't just "keep on doing what we've been doing".
Well, most java packages which I've seen seem to just be copy copies of
jpackage packages and / or based on the jpackage template, and those looked ok
Thus, the hold. When someone presents a set of reasonable guidelines
Java packages, we'll help knock them into shape and lift the hold. Very
few of us on the FPC have any Java experience, so we're relying on the
community with Java interest/experience to fill this void.
Well, I guess one of my first tasks as a new FPC member will be getting the
java package guidelines into shape then, I'll contact Lubomir Kundrak about
this, as he seems to be trying to get:
I still believe it would be ok to continue with reviewing java packages on a
best foot forward notion until the guidelines are finished though. I believe
that holding packages up for formal reasons like this (other then legal
formalities) tends to frustrate contributers, and thats the last thing we want
Thanks & Regards,