Colin Walters wrote:
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I can say that OpenNMS won't currently work with a 1.6 version because it's
developers have said so.
So what you're really saying is Fedora doesn't support Java < 6 very
well.
Yes, as in what pretty much all existing large projects use. I actually
haven't investigated this much beyond OpenNMS and would be happy to hear
otherwise about opengrok, alfresco, openfire, spark etc.
> I don't think anyone would disagree, but you have to understand
it's not a very interesting problem; these projects should really be
working to update for 6, regardless of Fedora or OpenJDK - Java 5 is
in pure maintenance mode now.
Maintenance mode is what developers using things like. No surprises.
I'm sure there's a fair amount of software out there that doesn't work
on Java 6, but it's not "most" by a long shot.
Do you have some examples of large and useful things like those above?
I suppose jboss should be the canonical example.
It's been well known for years how to install the proprietary
JDK;
Well known by?
Really...it's in a lot of FAQs, etc.
Are any of them fedora-hosted where a user would likely look for this
information?
That would have been just fine, but there have been long intervals where
jpackage has not had a suitable repo (and again, I don't see any reason that
should even have needed to change across fedora versions since java code is
pretty much independent of anything else)
Perhaps; I've personally only used the jpackage shims on RHEL (which
is much closer to jpackage's target audience).
But EL5 wasn't supported for long after its introduction either.
and in earlier conversations here
I thought someone said the relationship was deliberately broken with
portions moved into fedora packages and the rest ignored.
If Fedora and JPackage were on Facebook, the relationship status would
be "It's complicated". But we are cooperating on many levels, and I
would certainly not call it broken.
Is this changing? I do see some stuff for f7/8 that I didn't think was
there before.
Bottom line - should Fedora ship the proprietary JDK shim? I don't
think it's worth the user confusion over just telling people to go to
JPackage, but if someone stepped up, did the work, and submitted it
and was going to maintain/own it, it might happen.
If jpackage has a suitable documented repo, that's fine. I just
couldn't find any for fc7/8 or rhel5 for a year or so.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmiksell@xxxxxxxxx
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
