RFC: Signed JAR Packaging Policy

[Gary Benson]

Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le mardi 13 mars 2007 à 14:01 -0400, Matthew Miller a écrit :
> > On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 01:54:56PM -0400, Rob Crittenden wrote:
> > > But any random JVM that a user downloads from Sun or IBM
> > > directly wouldn't know about this extra endorsement, right?
> > > So any non-rpm-installed JVMs would still not work?
> > 
> > They would work fine for whatever they were installed for. They
> > just wouldn't work for this. Presuming that "this" can be made to
> > work just fine with gcj and/or future-free-java, then it should
> > just stay that way. Am I not getting something?
> > 
> > I mean, do we consider "the kernel doesn't build with Microsoft C"
> > a problem?
> 
> The kernel is mature and the main implementation. If fedora-packaged
> java apps fail when people try to use them with proprietary jvms
> that's a bigger problem. Till gcj is mature, efficient and
> recognized in the marketplace being able to mix and replace
> components (including the jvm) is a huge plus.

I was thinking with a view that post-F7 we will likely be able to ship
a modified Sun JVM.

Cheers,
Gary