Le mar 07/05/2002 � 11:22, Guillaume Rousse a �crit : > 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
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
