ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicolas Mailhot <Nicolas.Mail...@laposte.net>
Subject Re: [JPackage-devel] FW: jakarta ant 1.4.1/1.5 ant script
Date Tue, 07 May 2002 09:30:55 GMT
Le mar 07/05/2002 à 11:22, Guillaume Rousse a écrit :
> Ainsi parlait Lundi 6 Mai 2002 15:58, Nicolas Mailhot :
> > > - rpmmode option
> > > The name is badly chosen. Actually, behaviour has nothing to do with rpm,
> > > but with the fact that this software depends of other ones being
> > > installed in defined place, thus ant being part of a distribution. I'd
> > > have used something as standalone instead.
> >
> > I agree on this, if nobody objects will change rpmmode to standalone in
> > next version
> >
> > > Moreover, i still it is an error to have ant developpers taking care of
> > > this. The day when another packaging project will use yet another java
> > > repository and jar naming scheme, will them add another test case ?
> >
> > I *do* hope if someone else ever takes upon itslef this thankless task
> > he will try to use the same name as us.
> I know of at least two other similar project currently: Debian Java, and Real 
> Time Enterprises (http://sourceforge.net/projects/rte). I dunno how they 
> particular ant package works, but i think they are better qualified than 
> anyone else for ensuring it.
> 
> Which was my main point, btw: default ant script should only cares about 
> standalone installation, and let additional complexity to additional 
> providers.

Well, if we can agree on a sensible setup with ant-dev I really don't
think debian would choose another one without consulting at least
ant-dev.

That's very different from choosing a packaged setup when the original
project do not provide one.

(BTW at some point if we get agreement with ant-dev on some forme of
intergration I do expect se'll try to get debian approval)

Regards

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot

Mime
View raw message