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

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Java Naming Page

On Fri, 2006-07-14 at 10:48 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> I wonder how this discussion would go if we did s/Jpackage/DAG/ (or
> AT, or RPMForge, or any other external repository) and s/jpp/dag/.  I
> mean, honestly, how is the situation really all that different?

Nearly all of the java packages in Core are ongoing ports of JPackage.

At least some of the Core Java Packagers are the JPackage packagers.
They make changes to the JPackage package and then copy the changes back
to Core.

As Nicolas has expressed, JPackage is Core's immediate upstream for
these packages.

Core has adopted the JPackage methodology because they have intelligent,
well thought out rules that don't conflict with the distro.

So JPackage _is_ special.  The question for me is not whether there is a
special relationship but what goals we actually want to meet for users
and developers using our packages and which of those goals need to map
into changes to the Package Naming Guidelines and which can be achieved
in alternate fashion.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

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