On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 05:29:34PM +0200, Arnaud Vandyck wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Dalibor Topic a écrit : > > Matthias Klose <doko <at> cs.tu-berlin.de> writes: > > > >>now that non-free java jre's and jdk's are available in non-free, we > > Yeah! Thanks for the work!.. > > >>should get some agreement about the priorities for the different tools > >>and environments. some proposals: > >> > >>- things in main have higher priorities than things in contrib > >> and non-free. > > > > Sounds fine to me. > > OK. > > >>- an alternative installed as a "set" of alternatives has higher > >> priority than a single tool. > > > > Do you have an example in mind where that would be useful? > > gcj, kaffe better priority than jamvm, cacao, sablevm?
We decided at FOSDEM to make GCJ then default. The rest is ok with me. > >>- tools conforming to a higher "java version" have a higher priority > >> (unsure if that is necessary). > > > > We have no way to figure out which java version tools conform to, so I don't > > think that is possible. > > It can be useful for non-free jre/jdk, but not for the free vm's > > >>- ordering of the free runtimes. can we agree on some kind of order? > > > > I'd suggest a popcon based ordering. Reevaluate for every > > release / 6 months, etc. which should let us shuffle things > > around as necessary. > > We can also reevaluate just before the release. Fine. Michael -- Escape the Java Trap with GNU Classpath! http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html Join the community at http://planet.classpath.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]