Jan Schulz wrote: > Hm, still can't see the usecase for this: > If it is the same PAI version (say 2.1.x), then I don't want to have > 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 instaleld together. If not, then one of this will break.
Well, it depends. In case of final releases, you're probably right, but in case of the milestones it is another case. But they should be masked anyway ... > True. Unformtunatelly the big API breakage chnages were made so late > and now I have my exams coming up and won't really be able to > repackage eclipse (want to have them in different source packages, > build from CVS and with a different build system. debian... ) and so > it will take some more time, until I touch the 3.0 packaging. yeah, they're really not shy to mess-up their code competely ... ;-) >> Yes, but it is the same for every application platform: We should already >> handle EARs and WARs in a similar way. Looking at PHP, we have already a >> lot of them supported in portage. And did I mension mono applications ... >> ok, don't handle too much problems at the same time ;-) > > Do you actually have such 'applications' available as packages? I > think there are no such packages in debian (but debian-java is anyway > pretty small compared to jpackage or teh rest of debian) OK, in case of EARs they're very often commercial and therefore out of focus of Debian anyway, but WARs can be detected more often as OSS. Basically it's not different to webapps realized in PHP, it's just that there are a lot less ISPs offering JSP/servlets on servers for private people at interesting prices and therefore we have less applications. But looking at the large Java developer community, I suppose the number of free webapps and even EARs will grow. Regards, J�rg -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
