Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497756 --- Comment #8 from Mat Booth <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-04-28 07:33:32 EDT --- Holy crap, comments! Andrew, I especially like how you compose all of your thoughts into a single coherent comment. ;-) I agree we should build the latest LPG (and adding the native bits will be trivial), but porting DTP/CDT isn't something I'd be confident doing or have the time to commit to. However, the jar and Java package names changed between LPG 1 and LPG 2 so it would be possible to package both jars without conflict until such time as the LPG 1 jar can be obsoleted. So I propose the following packages: lpg: the main package containing the tool to generate grammar parsers (this is the native C++ bit) lpg-java: subpackage containing the java runtime library for java parsers generated by the tool in the main package (lpgruntime.jar) lpg-java-compat: subpackage containing the old java runtime library (lpgjavaruntime.jar) lpg-manual: programmer/user guides for both lpg and lpg-java lpg and lpg-java could be combined, of course, but DTP's dependency is only on the Java portion -- just depends on how much you care about that sort of thing. I can knock up such a package this evening if you approve. I will also fix my licence injection (a copy of the licence is packaged with the newest version) and fix my use of cp to install files (thanks Igor). Igor: The *-manual subpackage is just convention for java packages. API documentation goes in *-javadoc and other literature goes in *-manual. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review