Andrew Haley wrote:
On 25/02/15 00:31, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyJDKsInFedora
Change owner(s): Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
IMHO, this is
On 02/26/2015 02:54 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform in
Fedora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyJDKsInFedora
== Detailed Description ==
This is no real work proposal.
Stepping back, I’m not sure this has been
On 02/26/2015 04:26 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Robert Marcano rob...@marcanoonline.com
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 5:20:04 PM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform
On 02/26/2015 02:51 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/24/2015 10:34 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform in
Fedora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyJDKsInFedora
Change owner(s): Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
Currently
- Original Message -
From: Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 11:43:53 AM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
On 02/26/2015 02:51 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02
On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 15:46 +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/26/2015 02:46 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/26/2015 10:13 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/26/2015 09:23 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/26/2015 09:20 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/26/2015 08:42 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
Also,
On 02/27/2015 11:48 AM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 15:46 +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/26/2015 02:46 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/26/2015 10:13 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/26/2015 09:23 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/26/2015 09:20 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On
On 02/27/2015 11:47 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 11:43:53 AM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
On 02/26
- Original Message -
From: Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 12:54:04 PM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
On 02
in Fedora
- Original Message -
From: Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 12:54:04 PM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
of the Java
platform in Fedora
On 02/27/2015 11:47 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 11:43:53 AM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
On 02/27/2015 10:47 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
If we want to be sure that this legacy jdk will not interfere with
the system JDK let it not provide anything via alternatives. That
way people that want it can use it by playing with PATH/JAVA_HOME
(just like they do with other JVMs).
On 02/27/2015 10:58 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
The problem with alternatives is they are system wide so if one changes the
alternatives to point to the legacy JDK for their third party app this
becomes the JDK system wide. Thus all Fedora packaged Java apps (Tomcat,
Jetty, JBoss,
On 26/02/15 14:59, Mario Torre wrote:
In this case, it's about giving users one thing they asked, which is
easy access to a previous version of Java. We can't afford
maintaining it as Java Team, but this doesn't mean we will refuse to
help people doing it. In fact, the exact existence of this
On 25/02/15 00:31, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform
in Fedora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyJDKsInFedora
Change owner(s): Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
IMHO, this is not implementable for
On 02/27/2015 12:04 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 02/27/2015 10:47 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
If we want to be sure that this legacy jdk will not interfere with
the system JDK let it not provide anything via alternatives. That
way people that want it can use it by playing with PATH/JAVA_HOME
System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
On 02/27/2015 12:04 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 02/27/2015 10:47 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
If we want to be sure that this legacy jdk will not interfere with
the system JDK let it not provide anything
@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 1:42:53 PM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
On 02/27/2015 12:04 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 02/27/2015 10:47 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
If we want to be sure that this legacy jdk
On 02/27/2015 12:04 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 02/27/2015 10:47 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
If we want to be sure that this legacy jdk will not interfere with
the system JDK let it not provide anything via alternatives. That
way people that want it can use it by playing with PATH/JAVA_HOME
On 02/26/2015 09:43 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 10:39:35 AM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
On 02
On 02/26/2015 10:13 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/26/2015 09:23 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/26/2015 09:20 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/26/2015 08:42 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
Also, my proposal of introducing java metapackage (see my other post
in this thread), which would always require
On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 09:00 +0100, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/24/2015 08:36 PM, Sumit Bhardwaj wrote:
Hi All,
I have been reading this mail chain for some time and there is something I
wanted to say. It's kind
of a long mail, I apologize for taking so much of your time but request you
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 18:22 +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/24/2015 05:21 PM, Mario Torre wrote:
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 15:37 +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/24/2015 02:15 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/24/2015 12:43 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
I am against official guidelines or
On 02/26/2015 02:51 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
Small restart.
Looking to the discussion, although many people claimed against any
rules at the end it seems to me that everybody agree on some rules -
even if it would be existence of metapackage or only removed virtual
provides and priority
- Original Message -
From: Mario Torre neug...@redhat.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 4:59:35 PM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
- Original Message -
From: Robert Marcano rob...@marcanoonline.com
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 5:20:04 PM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
On 02/24/2015 05:04 AM, Jaroslav
On 02/26/2015 02:46 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/26/2015 10:13 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/26/2015 09:23 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/26/2015 09:20 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/26/2015 08:42 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
Also, my proposal of introducing java metapackage (see my other
post
On 02/24/2015 05:04 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform in
Fedora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyJDKsInFedora
Change owner(s): Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
Currently Fedora supports one main Java runtime and Java
On 02/26/2015 04:20 PM, Robert Marcano wrote:
On 02/24/2015 05:04 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform in
Fedora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyJDKsInFedora
Change owner(s): Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
Currently
On 02/24/2015 10:34 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform in
Fedora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyJDKsInFedora
Change owner(s): Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
Currently Fedora supports one main Java runtime and Java
= Proposed System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform in
Fedora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyJDKsInFedora
== Detailed Description ==
This is no real work proposal.
Stepping back, I’m not sure this has been said explicitly: this is really a
packaging
On 02/26/2015 09:46 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
If you really think that old JDK should be removed during update and
insist on that
I believe that at least on Windows apps, including browser apps, can
request a specific version of Java runtime. Malware asks for versions
that are vulnerable to
On 02/24/2015 08:36 PM, Sumit Bhardwaj wrote:
Hi All,
I have been reading this mail chain for some time and there is something I
wanted to say. It's kind
of a long mail, I apologize for taking so much of your time but request you to
please bear with me.
I work as a technical consultant on IBM
On 02/24/2015 06:22 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/24/2015 05:21 PM, Mario Torre wrote:
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 15:37 +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/24/2015 02:15 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/24/2015 12:43 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
I am against official guidelines or policy for
On 02/26/2015 09:16 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/25/2015 06:58 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
On 02/24/2015 06:41 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
Hello,
java would be the preferred JRE in Fedora. The package would have no
content, but it would have Requires on preferred Fedora JRE, currently
On 02/26/2015 09:23 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/26/2015 09:20 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/26/2015 08:42 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
Also, my proposal of introducing java metapackage (see my other post
in this thread), which would always require the latest JDK, solves
this
problem in a
On 02/25/2015 06:58 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
On 02/24/2015 06:41 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
Hello,
java would be the preferred JRE in Fedora. The package would have no
content, but it would have Requires on preferred Fedora JRE, currently
java-1.8.0-openjdk. This could be easily changed as
On 02/26/2015 08:45 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
I'm not really proposing as I haven't thought about this much yet, but
the idea was about be adding a few empty binary packages java,
java-devel, java-headless and so on (they could be subpackages of
javapackages-tools). Existing provides with the same
- Original Message -
From: Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 10:16:26 AM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
On 02/25/2015 06:58 PM, Miloslav Trmač
On 02/26/2015 09:31 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 10:16:26 AM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
- Original Message -
From: Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 10:39:35 AM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
On 02/26/2015 09:31 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov
- Original Message -
From: Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 9:52:42 AM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
On 02
On 02/26/2015 08:42 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
Also, my proposal of introducing java metapackage (see my other post
in this thread), which would always require the latest JDK, solves this
problem in a different way, without modifying ordinary Java packages
at all.
May you be more exact with the
On 02/26/2015 09:20 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/26/2015 08:42 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
Also, my proposal of introducing java metapackage (see my other post
in this thread), which would always require the latest JDK, solves this
problem in a different way, without modifying ordinary Java
On 02/26/2015 09:31 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
If no volunteer shows up for maintenance of old JDK then it would be
deprecated and obsoleted, as it's was done with previous JDK packages.
How would that work _exactly_?
1) JDK maintainers announce deprecation in advance and call for
On 02/24/2015 06:41 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
Hello,
java would be the preferred JRE in Fedora. The package would have no
content, but it would have Requires on preferred Fedora JRE, currently
java-1.8.0-openjdk. This could be easily changed as default JRE changes.
The same is for other
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 12:58:17 -0500,
Miloslav Trmač m...@redhat.com wrote:
1. JDK-(N+1) is first shipped. The maintainer of JDK-N intends not to package
it, so JDK-(N+1) includes Obsoletes:JDK-N from the start.
2. Someone revives JDK-N. Oops, it cannot be installed because JDK-(N+1)
On 02/24/2015 04:36 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com [2015-02-24 10:12]:
On 02/24/2015 04:06 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com [2015-02-24 09:58]:
On 02/24/2015 03:32 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
On 02/24/2015 05:04 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/24/2015 04:36 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com [2015-02-24 10:12]:
On 02/24/2015 04:06 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com [2015-02-24 09:58]:
On 02/24/2015 03:32 PM, Deepak Bhole
On 02/24/2015 05:21 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/24/2015 04:59 PM, Pete Travis wrote:
On Feb 24, 2015 8:32 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com wrote:
On 02/24/2015 02:17 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
I would much rather live without any legacy jdk, and if so then
without any
- Original Message -
From: Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 11:14:35 AM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
On 02/24/2015 04:06 PM, Jiri Vanek
/*Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com*/ wrote on Wed, 25 Feb 2015
10:07:28 +0100:
On 02/25/2015 06:39 AM, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
However, if there are JAR files which are useful
for a developer, they can have a -legacy version too!
There is no technical reason to suffix anything - you can
On 02/25/2015 10:55 AM, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
/*Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com*/ wrote on Wed, 25 Feb 2015
10:07:28 +0100:
On 02/25/2015 06:39 AM, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
However, if there are JAR files which are useful
for a developer, they can have a -legacy version too!
There
On 02/25/2015 06:39 AM, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
However, if there are JAR files which are useful
for a developer, they can have a -legacy version too!
There is no technical reason to suffix anything - you can put JARs that
depend on old version of JDK in /usr/{share,lib}/java-x.y.z, for
On 02/24/2015 04:06 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/24/2015 04:03 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/24/2015 03:51 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
2.) Ensure dist upgrades remove old JDK package (which may no longer
get security updates).
Firstly, as I understand upgrade isn't supposed to remove
On 02/24/2015 06:41 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
Hello,
java would be the preferred JRE in Fedora. The package would have no
content, but it would have Requires on preferred Fedora JRE, currently
java-1.8.0-openjdk. This could be easily changed as default JRE changes.
The same is for other
On 02/25/2015 10:07 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/25/2015 06:39 AM, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
However, if there are JAR files which are useful
for a developer, they can have a -legacy version too!
There is no technical reason to suffix anything - you can put JARs that
depend on old version
On 02/25/2015 06:39 AM, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
/*Kevin Kofler*/ wrote on Wed, 25 Feb 2015 01:31:59 +0100:
Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform
in Fedora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyJDKsInFedora
Change owner(s):
Hi All,
I have been reading this mail chain for some time and there is something
I wanted to say. It's kind of a long mail, I apologize for taking so
much of your time but request you to please bear with me. I work as a
technical consultant on IBM WebSphere, IBM BPM, Java/J2EE and Python
= Proposed System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform in
Fedora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyJDKsInFedora
Change owner(s): Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
Currently Fedora supports one main Java runtime and Java Development Kit (JDK)
and from time to time
= Proposed System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform in
Fedora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyJDKsInFedora
Change owner(s): Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
Currently Fedora supports one main Java runtime and Java Development Kit (JDK)
and from time to time
I am against official guidelines or policy for legacy JDK packages. I
don't think that any such policy is needed and it would only encourage
adoption of old packages for which there might be no security updates.
Of course package maintainers can agree on specific rules that apply to
their
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 13:34, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 12:43 +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
[...]
option one - introducing new packages - preferred
1. main jdk is proclaimed as dead as it was until now. The new jdk is
derived
as new package
On 02/24/2015 01:34 PM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 12:43 +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
[...]
option one - introducing new packages - preferred
1. main jdk is proclaimed as dead as it was until now. The new jdk is derived
as new package prviousName-legacy
Fedora
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 12:43 +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
[...]
option one - introducing new packages - preferred
1. main jdk is proclaimed as dead as it was until now. The new jdk is
derived
as new package prviousName-legacy
Fedora already supports multiple JDKs
Package maintainers are responsible for their packages. If maintainer of
main JDK is also maintaining legacy JDK then (s)he should be
responsible for both of them. I don't see why any special rule should be
defined.
You missed very important point. The maintainer will never be same. We (people
On 02/24/2015 01:50 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 13:34, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 12:43 +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
[...]
option one - introducing new packages - preferred
1. main jdk is proclaimed as dead as it was
On 02/24/2015 12:43 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
I am against official guidelines or policy for legacy JDK packages. I
don't think that any such policy is needed and it would only encourage
adoption of old packages for which there might be no security updates.
Well thats the point - people are
On 02/24/2015 01:34 PM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 12:43 +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
[...]
option one - introducing new packages - preferred
1. main jdk is proclaimed as dead as it was until now. The new jdk is
derived
as new package prviousName-legacy
On 02/24/2015 04:03 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/24/2015 03:51 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
2.) Ensure dist upgrades remove old JDK package (which may no longer
get security updates).
Firstly, as I understand upgrade isn't supposed to remove packages by
default, unless they are
* Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com [2015-02-24 09:58]:
On 02/24/2015 03:32 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski domi...@greysector.net [2015-02-24
09:29]:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 15:09, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
On 02/24/2015 04:06 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com [2015-02-24 09:58]:
On 02/24/2015 03:32 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski domi...@greysector.net [2015-02-24
09:29]:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 15:09, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Dominik
On 02/24/2015 02:17 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
I would much rather live without any legacy jdk, and if so then without any
rules. But not setting
them will bring chaos for majority of users.
I have a question: Is there anybody that stepped in to maintain the legacy
jdk?
If there is
* Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com [2015-02-24 10:12]:
On 02/24/2015 04:06 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com [2015-02-24 09:58]:
On 02/24/2015 03:32 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski domi...@greysector.net [2015-02-24
09:29]:
On
On 02/24/2015 03:51 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
2.) Ensure dist upgrades remove old JDK package (which may no longer
get security updates).
Firstly, as I understand upgrade isn't supposed to remove packages by
default, unless they are obsoleted or conflict with something. Are you
saying
On 02/24/2015 03:32 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski domi...@greysector.net [2015-02-24 09:29]:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 15:09, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski domi...@greysector.net [2015-02-24
09:04]:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 14:28, Jiri Vanek wrote:
[...]
There were several attempts in past like can you please support jdk
7,6...in newer fedoras and we always told no. When come speech about do it
on your own suddenly many questions marks raised up.
The last open bug is:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 15:09, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski domi...@greysector.net [2015-02-24 09:04]:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 14:28, Jiri Vanek wrote:
[...]
There were several attempts in past like can you please support jdk
7,6...in newer
On 02/24/2015 02:58 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 14:28, Jiri Vanek wrote:
[...]
There were several attempts in past like can you please support jdk
7,6...in newer fedoras and we always told no. When come speech about do it
on your own suddenly many
On 02/24/2015 02:15 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/24/2015 12:43 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
I am against official guidelines or policy for legacy JDK packages. I
don't think that any such policy is needed and it would only encourage
adoption of old packages for which there might be no security
- Original Message -
From: Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 3:02:38 PM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
On 02/24/2015 01:50 PM, Dominik 'Rathann
On 02/24/2015 02:17 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 3:02:38 PM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
On 02/24
* Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski domi...@greysector.net [2015-02-24 09:04]:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 14:28, Jiri Vanek wrote:
[...]
There were several attempts in past like can you please support jdk
7,6...in newer fedoras and we always told no. When come speech about do it
on your
* Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski domi...@greysector.net [2015-02-24 09:29]:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 15:09, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski domi...@greysector.net [2015-02-24
09:04]:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 14:28, Jiri Vanek wrote:
[...]
There
On 02/24/2015 03:11 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 15:09, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski domi...@greysector.net [2015-02-24 09:04]:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 14:28, Jiri Vanek wrote:
[...]
There were several attempts in
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 15:19 +0100, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/24/2015 02:58 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 14:28, Jiri Vanek wrote:
[...]
There were several attempts in past like can you please support jdk
7,6...in newer fedoras and we always told
On Feb 24, 2015 8:32 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com wrote:
On 02/24/2015 02:17 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
I would much rather live without any legacy jdk, and if so then
without any
rules. But not setting
them will bring chaos for majority of users.
I have a question: Is
On 02/24/2015 04:59 PM, Pete Travis wrote:
On Feb 24, 2015 8:32 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com wrote:
On 02/24/2015 02:17 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
I would much rather live without any legacy jdk, and if so then
without any
rules. But not setting
them will bring chaos for
On 02/24/2015 04:36 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com [2015-02-24 10:12]:
On 02/24/2015 04:06 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com [2015-02-24 09:58]:
On 02/24/2015 03:32 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 15:37 +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/24/2015 02:15 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/24/2015 12:43 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
I am against official guidelines or policy for legacy JDK packages. I
don't think that any such policy is needed and it would only encourage
Hello,
java would be the preferred JRE in Fedora. The package would have no
content, but it would have Requires on preferred Fedora JRE, currently
java-1.8.0-openjdk. This could be easily changed as default JRE changes.
The same is for other binary subpackages of java, respectively.
All
On 02/24/2015 05:21 PM, Mario Torre wrote:
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 15:37 +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/24/2015 02:15 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/24/2015 12:43 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
I am against official guidelines or policy for legacy JDK packages. I
don't think that any such
/*Kevin Kofler*/ wrote on Wed, 25 Feb 2015 01:31:59 +0100:
Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform
in Fedora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyJDKsInFedora
Change owner(s): Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
IMHO, this is not
Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform
in Fedora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyJDKsInFedora
Change owner(s): Jiri Vanek jva...@redhat.com
IMHO, this is not implementable for a simple practical reason: All the JARs
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:41:45PM -0500, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
Hello,
java would be the preferred JRE in Fedora. The package would have no
content, but it would have Requires on preferred Fedora JRE, currently
java-1.8.0-openjdk. This could be easily changed as default JRE changes.
The
95 matches
Mail list logo
