On 08/21/2013 05:59 PM, Jean-Christophe Bach wrote: > * hasufell <hasuf...@gentoo.org> [21.08.2013. @16:48:10 +0200]: > >> On 08/20/2013 05:12 PM, Randy Westlund wrote: >>> I've heard several people mention jitsi, but was surprised to find that >>> it's not in the portage tree. >>> >> >> Jitsi is written in java and thus by design buggy, bloated and hard to >> maintain. > > What a categorical opinion! Developers are writing code and are making > bugs, whatever the language they use. I am pretty sure I am able to > write buggy, bloated and hard to maintain with Haskell, Ada, Java or any > other language… > It is really easy to criticize the programming language instead of > reviewing the development methods. > > The main problem of writing an ebuild for a Java application comes from > bad habits in the Java world: people are usually distributing all > libraries and the program in a big ball of mud. It is great for Windows > users or for users who do not use a real packages manager, but it needs > lot of work to have clean packages. > > Regards, > > JC >
The average java application is buggy, bloated and hard to maintain. And that is a fact you have to realize as a distributor. The programming language "java" is another topic and it sucks too, but yes... you might be able to write non-buggy code.
