[Fedora-packaging] Ownership of /etc/maven/fragments and /usr/share/maven2/poms

Jason L Tibbitts III tibbs at math.uh.edu
Sat Jun 28 22:22:51 UTC 2008

Sorry for the resend; this should have the correct address for the
java list.

I hope I'm CC'ing this sufficiently; I do not know if any
representatives form the Java group are members of fedora-packaging.

I was reviewing my first maven-using package and ran into an issue
with the Java packaging guidelines.  Namely that they specify that
every maven-using package should own /etc/maven/fragments and
/usr/share/maven2/poms, which contradicts our usual policy on
directory ownership by multiple packages.

I don't really understand why the packages would need to own those
directories; jpackage-utils already serves as a kind of filesystem
package for java, it already owns /etc/maven and several
java-related directories in /usr/share, and all of the packages which
would own files in the two directories at issue already depend on it.
So I think jpackage-utils should just own /etc/maven/fragments and
/usr/share/maven2/poms and we can tweak the guidelines to not specify
that the individual packages own these directory.

Another possibility would be to shift this off to a java-filesystem
package analogous to our other *-filesystem packages which could own
these and various other java directories.

This would fix ownership issues for 22 packages currently.

Another separate bug related issue is the fact that the contents of
/etc/maven/fragments do not seem to be configuration files, and so
probably should not live under /etc.  I do not have sufficient Java
knowledge to propose a solution, however.

 - J<

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list