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 <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 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: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1190137
the guy is willing to maintain it.
Fine, so let him do it and drop the Obsoletes: tag in java-1.8.0-openjdk
and its successors. You shouldn't arbitrarily block people from
re-introducing an older branch of any package back into Fedora in the
first place.
We have no intention of blocking it. The reason for proposing these
restrictions is that the Fedora Java stack will not work with older
JDKs, therefore we need to make sure that it goes not get installed on
the system unless explicitly requested by someone who knows what they
are doing.
Well, you do that by adding/updating (Build)Requires: in the packages
which won't work otherwise, not by adding Obsoletes:.
That would generally work for most packages, but there is a new JDK
released every 2 years. This means that we would have to change the BR
and Requires for the entire Java stack (100s and 100s of packages) every
2 years, which is non-trivial.
First, we have versioned auto-requires generated during package build.
Explicit requires on java aren't usually needed. If package requires
"java > 1:1.7" then it is correct - the package can be assumed to work
with older JDK.
While that is true in terms of source compatibility, it will work only
if it is compiled with the older JDK.
Secondly, it is fairly easy to add requires on "java-devel >= 1:1.8" to
packages related to build systems like ant, maven or gradle. This would
cover most cases of building Java packages using latest JDK.
As you stated, it will cover most cases, but not all. More critically,
this does not solve the issue with requirement of 'java' itself.
These few remaining cases can be easily handled by provenpackager as
mass-change.
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 metapackage? Before I come up with legacy, I hoped to solve the
issues via some metapackage. At the end I gave up, because the touch of user was always necessary.
J.
Ah, I had missed that. Yes, the metapackage solution should work to the
same effect. I don't know if we can just call it 'java' though, unless
you are proposing that 'java' provision be removed from current openjdk
packages?
Deepak
--
Mikolaj Izdebski
Software Engineer, Red Hat
IRC: mizdebsk
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
