* Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net [2008-06-27 15:17]:
Le vendredi 27 juin 2008 à 14:14 -0400, Andrew Overholt a écrit :
Does anyone have any thoughts on this?
I'd rather you worked with Fernando Nasser and the other guys in Fedora's java place on common jar deployment rules, instead of reinventing the private app root dead-end that makes sharing resources next to impossible and encourages library forking and duplication
The JARs are 99% application-specific so putting them into a subdirectory makes sense to me and follows the guidelines we have in place. We have no library forking or duplication of the dependent JARs, either.
Andrew
Andrew Overholt wrote:
- Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net [2008-06-27 15:17]:
Le vendredi 27 juin 2008 à 14:14 -0400, Andrew Overholt a écrit :
Does anyone have any thoughts on this?
I'd rather you worked with Fernando Nasser and the other guys in Fedora's java place on common jar deployment rules, instead of reinventing the private app root dead-end that makes sharing resources next to impossible and encourages library forking and duplication
The JARs are 99% application-specific so putting them into a subdirectory makes sense to me and follows the guidelines we have in place. We have no library forking or duplication of the dependent JARs, either.
I agree. Eclipse's deployment problems are somewhat unusual. Debian's solution looks like a practical way to solve these problems.
Andrew.
java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Andrew Haley -
Andrew Overholt