Quoting David Walluck (2013-02-22 21:23:14)
> In the current guidelines, at least as implemented, most jars are
> renamed from upstream. There's not even the policy of preferring the
> upstream name by default. The policy seems to be to rename them from
> upstream by default (at least with multiple jars).
FYI, in case it wasn't obvious: when you build a package with XMvn it will put
jar files in %_javadir/%{name}/%{artifactId}.jar
I believe this solves both problems for Fedora (always unique non conflicting
paths) and yours (jar file renaming). You can do simple 'find /usr/share/java
-name some-weird-artifact.jar' and get a valid reply. Perhaps even multiple :-)
I hope that will make you a bit happier :-)
I believe most of us realize that current guideline text is convoluted, often
contradictory and messy. I think doing a simple base guideline and then one
sub-guideline per build system is the way to go long term. I.e. you first decide
what kind of package you have (ivy, maven, gradle..) and then go and look at
those specific guidelines. All generic stuff (file naming, Java EE APIs) should
be kept in main guidelines. That's for next iteration :-)
--
Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotnicky@xxxxxxxxxx>
Software Engineer - Developer Experience
PGP: 7B087241
Red Hat Inc. http://cz.redhat.com
--
java-devel mailing list
java-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
