Lamp is fine for me as well.
Am 16.12.2009 um 23:12 schrieb Daniel Moree <dmoree at shadowbranch.com>: > I think they could just be lumped into the lamp repo. Java if awful > webby! > > Phillip Smith wrote: >> >> 2009/12/17 Markus M. May <mmay at javafreedom.org>: >>> I think, that we need another repository for the Java Packages >>> (e.g. OpenJDK, Jetty, Tomcat, Sonar, Hudson, ....). These are (at >>> least from my perspective) some typical server components. >>> >>> What do you think? >> >> Does this really warrant a forth repo? Could they not be *loosely* >> termed to be part of a "lamp" setup? ;) >> >> I'd be inclined to either put them into the lamp repo, or the base >> repo rather than creating another repo... I'm thinking from a sys >> admin point of view though and the maintenance and scripting >> required to handle a 4th repo so if another repo is required, then >> I guess I'll just have to suck it up :P >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ArchServer Project General Mail List >> Post messages to: general at lists.archserver.org >> Administer your subscription: http://lists.archserver.org/listinfo/general >> > > _______________________________________________ > ArchServer Project General Mail List > Post messages to: general at lists.archserver.org > Administer your subscription: http://lists.archserver.org/listinfo/general -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.archserver.org/pipermail/general/attachments/20091216/2aa1e5ce/attachment.html>
