Re: Proposal: merge Jessie as an external project

[Archie Cobbs]

Thomas Zander wrote:
> From this thread I note that most developers are worried about distribution 
> issues, not development issues.  Which I find strange.
> A classpath user should not have to download the tarball and compile it 
> himself, and a typical user will not do that anyway.
> He will just apt-get (or yum*) the package and dependencies come along.  The 
> need to put external libraries in your CVS, is frowned upon in just about 
> all projects I have contributed on.

Yes, to me it seems like development and packaging are two
different things.

Seems like these things everyone agrees on..

1. Everyone agrees on the need for a "one stop shop" download
   to get a JDK equivalent (or more).

2. If Jessie's CVS moves into Classpath's CVS then that eliminates
   the forked code maintenance problem.

3. To the extent that Classpath itself contains components that
   someone (e.g. embedded system users) might not want, it would be
   nice if you could ./configure the build to optional exclude those
   components.. i.e., more build flexibility is a good thing. So e.g.
   we should have --enable-jessie and --disable-jessie, etc. (defaulting
   to --enable).

As long as #3 is realized then I guess I'm satisfied.. though I still
think it's a bad idea to have copies of code that originates elsewhere
actually checked in to our repo.

-Archie

__________________________________________________________________________
Archie Cobbs      *        CTO, Awarix        *      http://www.awarix.com