Hello all,
In other words, if distributing the jar 'svn-javahl.jar', the package
should be named 'libsvn-javahl-java'. Though I can't help but wondering
about the value of the javahl part of the package name.
I really doubt that this issue is release critical. I've looked through this
file:
[Thijs Kinkhorst]
While I can understand that it's good if the package names are all
according to some specified scheme, I don't think that the wrong name
makes the package in such a broken state that we should prevent it
from being released.
I've renamed the package to libsvn-java for the
So ... I'm CCing this to the debian-java list with a question: is it
reasonable to name a package 'libsvn-java' if the jar file it ships is
named svn-javahl.jar? I really don't like 'libsvn-javahl-java' as a
name (reminds me of 'python-pyvorbis'), but if policy requires it,
we'll use it.
[Charles Fry]
According to the current java policy, section 2.4:
Java libraries packages must be named libXXX[version]-java (without
the brackets), where the version part is optional and should only
contain the necessary part.
[...]
In other words, if distributing the jar
Yes, I wonder about that too. The jar file really is named svn-javahl,
for historical reasons: there was once a second effort (now dead, I
believe) to produce java bindings which were not high-level.
There is also an independent project out there, not affiliated with the
Subversion project
2006/7/11, Charles Fry [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The other package which I know of (which I was searching for in Debian)
is JavaSVN. (snip)
See also http://bugs.debian.org/374256.
Seo Sanghyeon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
Package: libsvn-javahl
Severity: serious
Justification: Java policy 2.4
Hi,
According to the current java policy, section 2.4:
Java libraries packages must be named libXXX[version]-java (without
the brackets), where the version part is optional and should only
contain the necessary
7 matches
Mail list logo
