On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 11:03 PM, Thierry Carrez<[email protected]> wrote: > It also uses a different default port, by the way. My point is that the > packaging is different, the upstream product is a major rewrite version, > so it's clearly not the same thing.
Renaming the package to jetty6 makes it more flexible (even if we might not need the flexibility currently). That is why I am in the jetty6 camp now. Should I ask the ftp-masters to reject the current jetty upload? I am willing to upload a jetty6 package. Cheers, Torsten _______________________________________________ pkg-java-maintainers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers
