Re: Splitting SLF4J

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi all,
I'm not familiar with packaging, but I'm very familiar with several
java projects on this list, I maintain some of them.

For the projects I'm involved with we moved away from SLF4J a couple
of years ago, so either Fedora is packaging very old versions or the
dependency descriptions are outdated.

I'd be happy to help reviewing these builds if you could spare some
pointers to where these things are maintained?
Just please don't assume I can patch them myself, this kind of
distribution for java dependencies got my attention but is an entirely
new concept to me.

My primary goal is to make sure users:
 - get the latest stable versions
 - keep their dependency tree lean

Sanne


On 7 March 2014 21:23, Christopher <ctubbsii@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 1:02 PM, David Walluck <david@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 03/07/2014 09:01 AM, Michael Simacek wrote:
>>> I've split the slf4j package into subpackages. The api, simple and
>>> nop submodules were left in the main package, in order not to break
>>> many packages
>>
>> In my opinion, the best way to do that is to have the slf4j package be
>> empty and then have Requires on the subpackages that you think you need.
>> One advantage of this method is that it allows a full package split.
>>
>> Even though I think that the current split is a step in the right
>> direction, it still shows the arbitrary way in which Fedora Java
>> packaging has always been done, where, instead of splitting all
>> artifacts according to upstream, the packager just chooses either a full
>> monolithic package with everything (usually with incorrect Requires), or
>> whimsically splits out some arbitrary subset of jars.
>>
>> Please note that this is not meant to be a criticism of this packager or
>> any packager generally, but an expression of my opinion in general.
>
> I agree with this. As a long-time Fedora user, hoping to start
> contributing some java packages (which will likely depend on slf4j), I
> think this would be a good precedent to set.
>
> --
> Christopher L Tubbs II
> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> --
> java-devel mailing list
> java-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
--
java-devel mailing list
java-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel





[Index of Archives]     [Red Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux