On Thu, 15 Nov 2001, Jason Dillon wrote:
> Woah... this is a bit much for me to troll over at the moment... but here > are some comments based on a brief look. Yeah, it took quite a bit to write as well. I've spent quite a bit of time today in email, not getting much real coding work done. :( > First, I don't really care about the details of debian stuff. If you do > that is greate. Sure. There's no need for you to know how to create a deb. Let me do that. Once it is done, then it is easy to understand. But the creation can be a bitch. > Sounds like we need to split up these non-free bits from the free bits. I > am all for that. How do we do that and still allow the build system to > work with little to no user or bs/lib maintainer overhead? Your suggestion below of 2 separate zips/tars is fine by me. > It looks like there is no way jboss could be put directly into 'main', since > it depends on non-free software "to do what it sets out to do". So I would > guess it would go into contrib, honestly I don't really care which module it > goes into. This is correct. > It would be nice if evey debian os came with JBoss by default if the user > wants J2EE, JMX or advanced java server support, but why not simply provide > our own packages, and provide docs on the lines to add to the apt-get config > file? My goal is to have it in Debian. It will get a wider audience that way. However, there is nothing precluding JBoss from having debs hosted on jboss.org. > Why do we need to provide a source package which contains all 'free' only > sources? If you need to do that, simply take a release from > 'jboss-all/build/build.sh release', strip out the bits you deem non-free, > hook those non-free bits up into the dependencies, then turn what is left > over into a package. Because then it is really free? If anything inside a bundle is not free, it taints the entire bundle. I want the 'free' zip/tar to be available for download from jboss.org, so that I can reference an md5sum for it, to show that I haven't modified the code. > If you really need a untouched release from JBoss with out these, then we > need to think about how that would be possible, if that would be possible. Yes, I really would like this. > I am open to ideas on how to seperate these, though I can tell you that > things like 'go download x from x.com, y from y.com' and so on will not fly. > I would expect that if this worked at all it would be, here is the > jboss-xxx.zip with LGPL and here is jboss-thirdparty-xxx.zip with (long list > of varing licenses which allow us to distribute it). > > A user would then unzip each at the same level and have a happy release to > start using. cvs co jboss-all cd jboss-all # this gives jboss*, plus tools and thirdparty. ant build free-dist # This creates zips/tars of everything BUT tools/thirdparty. ant build nonfree-dist # This creates zips/tars of tools/thirdparty. ant build dist # This creates zips/tars of everything. Doing simple exlusions like above seems easy to do. I don't care how jboss is stored in cvs. I'm just interested in the final files that get downloaded. _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
