[Fedora-packaging] Suggested updated Java guidelines

[Andrew Overholt]

Hi,

* Alexander Boström <abo at root.snowtree.se> [2010-01-02 09:54]:
> I submitted a review for java-gnome and working on that made me think
> the Java guidelines needs work, so here's a suggested update:

Thanks for doing this!

> Removed some occurances of a Unicode control character that didn't seem
> to belong there.

Cool.

> Fixed formatting of the text under "Jar file naming".

Okay.

> Hopefully clarified the text under "Directory structure".

This is fine.  The "JNI" link is still broken but that's not new :)

> Changed some occuranced of "<code>%{_xxx</code>}" into
> "<code>%{_xxx}</code>".
> 
> Changed -javadoc Group tag from "Development Documentation" to
> "Documentation".

Thanks.

> Mostly rewrote the section on JNI packaging. (See wiki.)

This looks good.

> Removed this text:
> 
>         The <code>%{_jnidir</code>} rpm macro defines the main JNI jar
>         repository. Like <code>%{_javadir</code>} it is declined in
>         <code>-ext</code> and <code>-x.y.z</code> variants. It follows
>         exactly the same rules as the <code>%{_javadir</code>}-derived
>         tree structure, except that it hosts JAR files that use JNI.
> 
>         <code>%{_jnidir</code>} usually expands into
>         <code>/usr/lib/java</code>.
> 
> It seems to belong to the "The plan is to eventually..." part, but I
> don't really understand it. Explain and I'll add something back. :)

First off, "declined" should be "defined".  I think the "-ext" and
"-x.y.z" variants are JVM package variabnts.  It's unfortunate that we
can't have a standard directory structure defined in jpackage-utils.
I'm not sure the macro is useful enough to warrant this
potentially-confusing text.

> Partially rewrote the section on prebuilt binaries and the suggested %
> prep section. (See wiki.)

This is good, thanks.

I think all of these changes will benefit the guidelines and would like
to see them added to the wiki.

Andrew