FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Java

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-08-2011, 06:14 PM
Vincent Fourmond
 
Default How to package Nuxeo DM, a Java EE application, in Debian

[CCing you as I don't know if you have subscribed to debian-java]

Hello,

On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Julien CARSIQUE <jcarsique@nuxeo.com> wrote:
> About versions and shared resources, sharing libraries is nice but not
> always reliable and, tell me if I'm wrong, I guess a lot of Debian
> applications are bringing their own unshared libraries.

Actually, you are wrong here.

Maybe to clarify a bit the context, here is how a package is
admitted (the first time) into the Debian archives. It is reviewed by
a small team of volunteers called FTP masters. Their job is to keep
the archive legal and easy to maintain. What they do is the following:

* they review the copyright and license status of all the code
uploaded. Any sourceless compiled code gets a refusal. There's no way
around that.
* they try to minimize duplicated code in Debian. The Debian
Security Team keeps tracks of *all* duplicated code in Debian. To make
their job easy, we as maintainers keep the amount of duplicated code
to the strictest minimum. I don't know how many cases of duplicated
code there currently are in the archive, but I'd estimate it to a few
dozens (please correct me if I'm wrong !), for a total of about 15000
source packages. So duplicated code is a no-go.

I must insist on the fact that this policy is strictly enforced.
Even if we, as Debian Developers, wanted to get such a package in, it
simply would never make it. And for good reasons too.

More information about this can be found on the Reject FAQ:

http://ftp-master.debian.org/REJECT-FAQ.html

If you want to get Nuxeo into Debian, which is a worthy goal, great
effort will be needed to package *all* Nuxeo runtime or buildtime
dependencies.

My point is not to discourage you or express scorn or whichever
negative view on Nuxeo, but just to state the sine qua none conditions
for a package to enter Debian.

Cheers, and good luck !

Vincent


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: AANLkTimYTgA7LoQS_QbxZPW1m-f-+OtWSwz2nt+=SzjP@mail.gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTimYTgA7LoQS_QbxZPW1m-f-+OtWSwz2nt+=SzjP@mail.gmail.com
 
Old 02-08-2011, 06:25 PM
Andrew Ross
 
Default How to package Nuxeo DM, a Java EE application, in Debian

Hi Julian,

Others have covered the constraints for getting your package into
Debian. There is one possible alternative you might consider if the work
to package into Debian is too time consuming. You could publish your own
apt repository containing your package. This would require users to add
your repository to their list in order to install your package, but once
they'd done that then updates would be handled in the same was as for
any other package.

Because you would host the archive, you'd be responsible for ensuring
legality of your packages, so making sure all the jars have source
available, etc. It's not an ideal solution, as users might expect to be
able to get all the source by downloading the source package, but
instead they'd find the source package contains lots of jar files. It
would let you get something out there though, and in time you could
separately package your dependencies.

I hope this gives you an alternative, although I also hope you'll
consider making the effort to get your packages into the main Debian
distribution.

Thanks,
Andy


On 08/02/11 17:34, Julien CARSIQUE wrote:

> If we cannot match the Debian repositories rules, because of the current
> distance between Maven and Debian, isn't there an "open-source partner
> repository" ? Maybe is it naive but I think it's much more legitimate to
> get Nuxeo into Debian than proprietary packages.
>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4D5198B1.6080701@rossfamily.co.uk">http://lists.debian.org/4D5198B1.6080701@rossfamily.co.uk
 
Old 02-08-2011, 06:46 PM
Stefane Fermigier
 
Default How to package Nuxeo DM, a Java EE application, in Debian

On Feb 8, 2011, at 8:14 PM, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
>
> My point is not to discourage you or express scorn or whichever
> negative view on Nuxeo, but just to state the sine qua none conditions
> for a package to enter Debian.

Out of curiosity, how many large Java application are currently packaged in Debian ?

I couldn't find even one personally, on Debian 6.0:

root@gange# apt-cache search xwiki
root@gange# apt-cache search openbravo
root@gange# apt-cache search concursive
root@gange# apt-cache search liferay
libportlet-api-2.0-spec-java-doc - Java Portlet Specification V2.0 - documentation
libportlet-api-2.0-spec-java - Java Portlet Specification V2.0
root@gange# apt-cache search compiere
libjtds-java - JDBC 3.0 driver for Microsoft SQL Server(tm) and Sybase(tm)
root@gange# apt-cache search ofbiz
root@gange# apt-cache search opencrx
root@gange# apt-cache search jboss-portal

etc. So it seems either that nobody cares about getting these fine (and popular) applications into Debian, or it's just too hard to do given the current set of policies.

S.

--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 9C9CC1A4-0A85-4716-B6AE-F134A113A57A@nuxeo.com">http://lists.debian.org/9C9CC1A4-0A85-4716-B6AE-F134A113A57A@nuxeo.com
 
Old 02-08-2011, 06:49 PM
Stefane Fermigier
 
Default How to package Nuxeo DM, a Java EE application, in Debian

On Feb 8, 2011, at 8:25 PM, Andrew Ross wrote:

> Hi Julian,
>
> Others have covered the constraints for getting your package into
> Debian. There is one possible alternative you might consider if the work
> to package into Debian is too time consuming. You could publish your own
> apt repository containing your package.

It's already been done, as I stated in the beginning of this thread, see:

http://blogs.nuxeo.com/fermigier/2010/07/debian-and-ubuntu-packages-available-for-nuxeo-dm-532-stable.html
http://blogs.nuxeo.com/fermigier/2010/12/new-beta-nuxeo-dm-package-debian-ubuntu.html

> I hope this gives you an alternative

It is an alternative, but if we found it satisfactory, we wouldn't be pushing so hard to get the packages in Debian and Ubuntu.

S.

--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 60A2B05F-67C3-4D6F-B712-DB76337BFBB2@nuxeo.com">http://lists.debian.org/60A2B05F-67C3-4D6F-B712-DB76337BFBB2@nuxeo.com
 
Old 02-08-2011, 08:22 PM
"Damien Raude-Morvan"
 
Default How to package Nuxeo DM, a Java EE application, in Debian

Bonjour Stéfane

Le mardi 08 février 2011 20:46:27, Stefane Fermigier a écrit :
> On Feb 8, 2011, at 8:14 PM, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
> > My point is not to discourage you or express scorn or whichever
> > negative view on Nuxeo, but just to state the sine qua none conditions
> > for a package to enter Debian.
>
> Out of curiosity, how many large Java application are currently packaged in
> Debian ?
>
> I couldn't find even one personally, on Debian 6.0:
>
> root@gange# apt-cache search liferay
[...]

As an example, let's talk about Liferay as I've personnaly started working on
Liferay 6.x package [1]. My work is currenty stalled by some serious legal
issues on Liferay dependencies...

=> Liferay depends on "Java Content Repository 2.0" (like Nuxeo I bet) : this
API is clearly non-free for Debian (Debian Free Software Guidelines - DFSG) as
"Day Licence" doesn't allow modification... [2].

Apache Software Foundation has currently a special exception [3] to their
guideline for this particular API : I don't think Debian is ready to sacrifice
its DFSG to include something like that in our main archive...
I do not even understand how the JCP could accept such a license for such
essential component of Java ecosystem...

> etc. So it seems either that nobody cares about getting these fine (and
> popular) applications into Debian, or it's just too hard to do given the
> current set of policies.

I *do* care about those software but Debian is not just another "AppStore for
.deb packages". Like we care about our users, but we also care about free
software, licences, integration, security...

I see three way of handling all this :

1) we manage to package all *versionned* dependencies of Nuxeo. Doesn't seem a
viable solution : are we supposed to include 13 versions of Log4J or 8
versions of Commons Lang, each for one application in Debian ?

2) We distribute Nexuo with "binary JARs" in non-free repository (which seems
a little sad for such an wonderful free software product...)

3) We use already existing Java librairies packages in Debian and packages
*all* missing librairies. Nuxeo will then use shared librairies instead of
embedded one. But this will break existing QA done by Nuxeo internally...

Anyone with better ideas ?

[1] http://bugs.debian.org/569819
[2] http://bugs.debian.org/573482
[3] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#no-modification

Cheers,
--
Damien - Debian Developper
http://wiki.debian.org/DamienRaudeMorvan
 
Old 02-09-2011, 04:12 AM
tony mancill
 
Default How to package Nuxeo DM, a Java EE application, in Debian

On 02/08/2011 11:46 AM, Stefane Fermigier wrote:
> On Feb 8, 2011, at 8:14 PM, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
>>
>> My point is not to discourage you or express scorn or whichever
>> negative view on Nuxeo, but just to state the sine qua none conditions
>> for a package to enter Debian.
>
> Out of curiosity, how many large Java application are currently packaged in Debian ?
>
> I couldn't find even one personally, on Debian 6.0:
>
> root@gange# apt-cache search xwiki
> root@gange# apt-cache search openbravo
> root@gange# apt-cache search concursive
> root@gange# apt-cache search liferay
> libportlet-api-2.0-spec-java-doc - Java Portlet Specification V2.0 - documentation
> libportlet-api-2.0-spec-java - Java Portlet Specification V2.0
> root@gange# apt-cache search compiere
> libjtds-java - JDBC 3.0 driver for Microsoft SQL Server(tm) and Sybase(tm)
> root@gange# apt-cache search ofbiz
> root@gange# apt-cache search opencrx
> root@gange# apt-cache search jboss-portal
>
> etc. So it seems either that nobody cares about getting these fine (and popular) applications into Debian, or it's just too hard to do given the current set of policies.

I think this is a fair point. It *is* very difficult to package large Java
applications for Debian. (There happens to be a similar thread on this topic on
debian-gis at the moment as well.) From the point of view of a software company
that wants to provide a .deb of their application, it is a huge amount of
additional work, and it's not always clear what sort of immediate return on
investment this will garner the software vendor.

The Debian position on licensing and eliminating duplicate code has been well
represented in this thread, so I'd like to comment on how things might progress.
What I hope to see happen is that Debian will continue to package more and more
of the popular Java libraries needed for these applications and frameworks, to
the point where Debian becomes a development platform of choice because (a) it's
less work to apt-get everything than it is to find and pull JARs manually, (b)
there are no licensing worries when you develop on Debian, and (c) there is an
active concern for security. That is, over time, the situation from the
software vendor's perspective will improve.

This doesn't address the QA concerns - I don't suppose companies can always
develop and release from stable - but it should help to reduce the vast
differences that exist today. In the meantime, Andrew Ross's suggestion of
operating an external APT repository to ship .debs of product seems like a
practical and convenient way to address applications that cannot (yet) be
uploaded into the Debian archives.

0.02,
tony


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4D522258.6050108@debian.org">http://lists.debian.org/4D522258.6050108@debian.org
 
Old 02-09-2011, 04:22 AM
Russ Allbery
 
Default How to package Nuxeo DM, a Java EE application, in Debian

tony mancill <tmancill@debian.org> writes:

> What I hope to see happen is that Debian will continue to package more
> and more of the popular Java libraries needed for these applications and
> frameworks, to the point where Debian becomes a development platform of
> choice because (a) it's less work to apt-get everything than it is to
> find and pull JARs manually,

The hard sell here is that Maven is essentially apt-get for Java
developers, and Maven hosts a central repository that just about everyone
uses, very similar to Debian's archive except for Java JARs. So the
normal selling points for Debian packaging of the libraries, while still
very much there for administrators doing deployment and concerned about
security updates, isn't really there for developers.

Maven has other issues, mind, and I still agree with Debian's direction,
but I can understand why people who are largely living in the Java world
aren't happy with it. And I admit that right now for the internal
Stanford project that started off my interest in this we're just making
quick and dirty packages of WAR files or shaded JARs built with Maven
rather than doing it right. But I'm hoping to go back and clean that up
later.

I think one key is going to be to make it really, *really* easy to package
a JAR file, so that the number of packages required are less intimidating.
The major issues that I think we'll run into is that a lot of Java
development has a very iffy notion of source availability and licensing,
and Maven's very tight and specific versioning support means that people
are not as careful about ABI compatibility as they really should be.

It's going to be a hard problem.

--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 87bp2laijs.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu">http://lists.debian.org/87bp2laijs.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu
 
Old 02-09-2011, 06:40 AM
Giovanni Mascellani
 
Default How to package Nuxeo DM, a Java EE application, in Debian

On 09/02/2011 06:12, tony mancill wrote:
>> etc. So it seems either that nobody cares about getting these fine
>> (and popular) applications into Debian, or it's just too hard to do
>> given the current set of policies.
>
> I think this is a fair point. It *is* very difficult to package
> large Java applications for Debian. (There happens to be a similar
> thread on this topic on debian-gis at the moment as well.) From the
> point of view of a software company that wants to provide a .deb of
> their application, it is a huge amount of additional work, and it's
> not always clear what sort of immediate return on investment this
> will garner the software vendor.

I'd say that this one of the main added value of a distribution: many
different pieces of software harmonized together, under a consistent
policy so that people that want to change something in the source code
and recompile just have to do apt-get source, hack the code and
dpkg-buildpackage.

Of course I'm not pretending that this is going to satisfy all the kind
of users: it's just what Debian users are expecting, so it's what Debian
is offering to its users. Probably other distributions make things
differently because they are targeted to users with different needs.
Other users could prefer the way maven works, so they will use maven to
install their package.

About the difficulty of having a Java application in Debian, I cannot
agree more with Tony: packaging things in Debian is difficult, because
it requires some added value that the packager must put into the
package, and added value requires time. This is true especially in the
Java environment, where many programmers put very low attention to many
things that Debian cares about (and that have been already discussed in
this thread). I'm not discussing who is right and who is not (though I
have an idea about it, but it could be significantly biased): simply,
the two ways of work have very little intersection.

And, unfortunately, one of the core philosophies in Debian is that we're
not trading quality for time or package number: if the available
resources (that is, people that contribute to Debian) are scarce, then
what we're giving up is quantity, not quality. Usually we're also able
to offer quantity, but it's not our main focus.

BTW, in my little experience, I've already met at least two different
pieces of software written in Java that were non free or even non
redistributable because of licensing issues rising from putting JARs or
copy and pasting code without checking if they were allowed to do so.
I'm proud to say that, thanks to my work, now these pieces of software
are really free in Debian: I'm sure this is not the only case, but it
shows why all the thorough work that a Debian package needs it's useful.

Giovanni.
--
Giovanni Mascellani <mascellani@poisson.phc.unipi.it>
Pisa, Italy

Web: http://poisson.phc.unipi.it/~mascellani
Jabber: g.mascellani@jabber.org / giovanni@elabor.homelinux.org
 
Old 02-09-2011, 08:06 AM
Stefane Fermigier
 
Default How to package Nuxeo DM, a Java EE application, in Debian

On Feb 9, 2011, at 8:40 AM, Giovanni Mascellani wrote:

> On 09/02/2011 06:12, tony mancill wrote:
>>> etc. So it seems either that nobody cares about getting these fine
>>> (and popular) applications into Debian, or it's just too hard to do
>>> given the current set of policies.
>>
>> I think this is a fair point. It *is* very difficult to package
>> large Java applications for Debian. (There happens to be a similar
>> thread on this topic on debian-gis at the moment as well.) From the
>> point of view of a software company that wants to provide a .deb of
>> their application, it is a huge amount of additional work, and it's
>> not always clear what sort of immediate return on investment this
>> will garner the software vendor.
>
> I'd say that this one of the main added value of a distribution: many
> different pieces of software harmonized together, under a consistent
> policy so that people that want to change something in the source code
> and recompile just have to do apt-get source, hack the code and
> dpkg-buildpackage.
>
> Of course I'm not pretending that this is going to satisfy all the kind
> of users: it's just what Debian users are expecting, so it's what Debian
> is offering to its users.

Maybe I'm an exception, but I've been a Debian user since 1997 or 1998 (not exclusively, but since that time I have always had from 1 to 30 Debian or Ubuntu servers to manage), and my home computer is an Ubuntu.

I have NEVER used "apt-get source, hack[ed] the code and dpkg-buildpackage." Not a single time.

Also, in the context of enterprise applications, you just don't want to "apt-get source, hack the code and dpkg-buildpackage." You want to run it through a massive amount of QA before putting it into production.

Cf. http://qa.nuxeo.org/ for an example of what we do at Nuxeo.

> Probably other distributions make things
> differently because they are targeted to users with different needs.
> Other users could prefer the way maven works, so they will use maven to
> install their package.

Maven is a build tool, not an installation tool.

> About the difficulty of having a Java application in Debian, I cannot
> agree more with Tony: packaging things in Debian is difficult, because
> it requires some added value that the packager must put into the
> package, and added value requires time.

This is not true, if the only thing needed was "some extra added value" there would be

> This is true especially in the
> Java environment, where many programmers put very low attention to many
> things that Debian cares about (and that have been already discussed in
> this thread). I'm not discussing who is right and who is not (though I
> have an idea about it, but it could be significantly biased): simply,
> the two ways of work have very little intersection.

We're talking about *open source* java developers, not just "java developers" here.

From my experience with working with both the Apache Foundation (I'm with the incubating Apache Chemistry and Stanbol projects), and the Eclipse Foundation (Eclipse Apogee, and a new project that willbe announced today), I can guarantee you that their processes are as annoying (or if you prefer, *rigourous* that Debian's (wrt licenses, copyright notices, etc.)

> And, unfortunately, one of the core philosophies in Debian is that we're
> not trading quality for time or package number: if the available
> resources (that is, people that contribute to Debian) are scarce, then
> what we're giving up is quantity, not quality. Usually we're also able
> to offer quantity, but it's not our main focus.
>
> BTW, in my little experience, I've already met at least two different
> pieces of software written in Java that were non free or even non
> redistributable because of licensing issues rising from putting JARs or
> copy and pasting code without checking if they were allowed to do so.
> I'm proud to say that, thanks to my work, now these pieces of software
> are really free in Debian: I'm sure this is not the only case, but it
> shows why all the thorough work that a Debian package needs it's useful.

Were these projects from "reputable" organization such as Apache or Eclipse, or open source vendors concerned with the quality of their products and minimizing the legal risk attached to their products ?

Regards,

S.

--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 0B6A4504-C9E9-48FF-899B-BCFF43A39619@nuxeo.com">http://lists.debian.org/0B6A4504-C9E9-48FF-899B-BCFF43A39619@nuxeo.com
 
Old 02-09-2011, 08:45 AM
Giovanni Mascellani
 
Default How to package Nuxeo DM, a Java EE application, in Debian

Hi.

On 09/02/2011 10:06, Stefane Fermigier wrote:
>> I'd say that this one of the main added value of a distribution:
>> many different pieces of software harmonized together, under a
>> consistent policy so that people that want to change something in
>> the source code and recompile just have to do apt-get source, hack
>> the code and dpkg-buildpackage.
>>
>> Of course I'm not pretending that this is going to satisfy all the
>> kind of users: it's just what Debian users are expecting, so it's
>> what Debian is offering to its users.
>
> Maybe I'm an exception, but I've been a Debian user since 1997 or
> 1998 (not exclusively, but since that time I have always had from 1
> to 30 Debian or Ubuntu servers to manage), and my home computer is an
> Ubuntu.
>
> I have NEVER used "apt-get source, hack[ed] the code and
> dpkg-buildpackage." Not a single time.
>
> Also, in the context of enterprise applications, you just don't want
> to "apt-get source, hack the code and dpkg-buildpackage." You want to
> run it through a massive amount of QA before putting it into
> production.
>
> Cf. http://qa.nuxeo.org/ for an example of what we do at Nuxeo.

Sorry, I may have missed some context: of course upstream developers
don't use Debian package's sources, they work directly on the
development copy they have. My "apt-get source, hack and dpkg-bp" was
seen from a derivative developer or sysadmin that has to modify the way
a software works on its own system or distribution.

>> Probably other distributions make things differently because they
>> are targeted to users with different needs. Other users could
>> prefer the way maven works, so they will use maven to install their
>> package.
>
> Maven is a build tool, not an installation tool.

Just substitute the word "maven" with any installation tool you
recommend for Nuxeo or whatever software we're talking about (including,
for example, an APT repository different from the official Debian
repositories).

The key here is that there are many software installation tool and many
different repositories for each one of these different tools. The
software that goes in Debian's main archive is allowed to be there only
if it complied with Debian policy. There are many good reasons to think
that the Debian policy is a good thing and probably you have others to
think that other ways would be better: however, people using Debian
repositories expect that repositories to be compliant with the Debian
policy, and probably this is a reason because of they choose them. If
you think that some pieces of software would benefit from being
redistributed under a different policy, then build a different
repository. Pretending that it should enter Debian violation its policy
doesn't benefit anyone (and, as a matter of facts, is not possible,
because it would be rejected).

>> About the difficulty of having a Java application in Debian, I
>> cannot agree more with Tony: packaging things in Debian is
>> difficult, because it requires some added value that the packager
>> must put into the package, and added value requires time.
>
> This is not true, if the only thing needed was "some extra added
> value" there would be

What is not true? The fact that packaging things in Debian is difficult
or the fact that it's so because it requires some added value?

Of course, we could disagree on whether modifying a package to conform
with Debian policy is an added value or not: sure, the perceived added
value depends on what you want to do with a package and which are your
priorities. Debian stated long ago its priorities and it'll continue to
stick to them. Debian users are (or at least should be) aware of them:
if the policy isn't good enough for their needs, they should probably
find a different distribution. After all there are many distributions
around just because different people had different ideas an what a
distribution should be.

If you agree to have your software in Debian under these conditions,
then we're happy to host it, of course. If you think that it's going to
take too much time, I can't blame you. I fully understand that people
not interested into Debian goals don't want to invest time in such
goals. What I hope to have made clear is that I'm not pretending that
you're package shouldn't enter Debian on a prejudicial position: I'm
just clearing out what criteria we have to include a package or not. If
you're interested in these criteria, you're in. Otherwise, I'm just
warning you that Debian is not the right place for your packages. As I
(and other people) already said, a personal APT repository would be
better and it would require three lines of command instead of one. Not
that bad loss... :-)

>> This is true especially in the Java environment, where many
>> programmers put very low attention to many things that Debian cares
>> about (and that have been already discussed in this thread). I'm
>> not discussing who is right and who is not (though I have an idea
>> about it, but it could be significantly biased): simply, the two
>> ways of work have very little intersection.
>
> We're talking about *open source* java developers, not just "java
> developers" here.

I didn't even consider the existence of Java non free software developers.

> From my experience with working with both the Apache Foundation (I'm
> with the incubating Apache Chemistry and Stanbol projects), and the
> Eclipse Foundation (Eclipse Apogee, and a new project that willbe
> announced today), I can guarantee you that their processes are as
> annoying (or if you prefer, *rigourous* that Debian's (wrt
> licenses, copyright notices, etc.)

Not about embedded library copies, for example (as far as I can tell).
I'm not saying that Apache or Eclipse are working bad, but they're are
working differently in some ways. But Debian is made the Debian's way,
not Apache's way.

>> And, unfortunately, one of the core philosophies in Debian is that
>> we're not trading quality for time or package number: if the
>> available resources (that is, people that contribute to Debian) are
>> scarce, then what we're giving up is quantity, not quality. Usually
>> we're also able to offer quantity, but it's not our main focus.
>>
>> BTW, in my little experience, I've already met at least two
>> different pieces of software written in Java that were non free or
>> even non redistributable because of licensing issues rising from
>> putting JARs or copy and pasting code without checking if they were
>> allowed to do so. I'm proud to say that, thanks to my work, now
>> these pieces of software are really free in Debian: I'm sure this
>> is not the only case, but it shows why all the thorough work that a
>> Debian package needs it's useful.
>
> Were these projects from "reputable" organization such as Apache or
> Eclipse, or open source vendors concerned with the quality of their
> products and minimizing the legal risk attached to their products ?

No, of course. But what does this change? From the point of view of me
and many users, geogebra is much more important than JBoss, even it's
not written by some big foundation.

Giovanni.
--
Giovanni Mascellani <mascellani@poisson.phc.unipi.it>
Pisa, Italy

Web: http://poisson.phc.unipi.it/~mascellani
Jabber: g.mascellani@jabber.org / giovanni@elabor.homelinux.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:12 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org