On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 22:08 -0700, Casey Marshall wrote: > >>>>> "Archie" == Archie Cobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Archie> Thomas Fitzsimmons wrote: > >> I propose that we build Jessie directly into glibj.zip. Having > >> Jessie present by default would be convenient both for GNU > >> Classpath developers and also for packagers. For GNU Classpath > >> developers who want to test apps that require SSL, it would mean > >> one less dependency to fetch and setup on CLASSPATH. For packagers > >> obviously it would mean one less package to maintain. More > >> importantly though, it would eliminate a circular dependency. In > >> Fedora Core 4, for example we want a Java SSL provider available by > >> default. This means that ideally the libgcj package should depend > >> on the Jessie package. But Jessie's build requires libgcj. We > >> worked around this by having java-gcj-compat depend on both libgcj > >> and Jessie, and packages requiring a Java SSL provider requiring > >> java-gcj-compat. However in my opinion this complexity is > >> unwarranted especially given that Jessie's SSL provider jar is only > >> 350K. > > I support doing this, and would even rather see it get its packages > renamed to 'gnu.jessie', or 'gnu.javax.net.ssl', eventually. >
If you're willing to maintain this code in the GNU Classpath repository then should we just do this rename right away? Shall I post a patch? Tom _______________________________________________ Classpath mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
