Re: bug submission justified for distribution of obsolete java software?

[m.roth@xxxxxxxxx]

Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Giles Coochey <giles@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> But you'd be wrong on all counts.  I'd argue the opposite - that you
>>> should only be allowed to use languages that work across CPU types and
>>> OS's so as to never be locked into a monopolistic single vendor.
>>>
>> So if I were to develop a CPU type and/or OS that didn't support Java
>> then you would lock yourself out of the very language you appear to
>> advocate?
>
> Being locked out of some oddball thing is not at all the same
> situation as being locked into what only a single vendor provides. But
> try something like 'jenkins'  (http://jenkins-ci.org/) with an
> assortment of cross-platform nodes to get the idea of how handy a
> language with remoting across many platforms can be.  It's painless to
> install try, even if you only use it on a single box.

I have a one-word answer: perl. A longer answer - are you suggesting
system admin chores being done using some kind of java monstrosity? I
mean, I don't remember what Spacewalk's written in, but it was a very
large pain, and if it's not in java, then the java version would be a
*lot* worse.....

        mark

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos