Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
"FN" == Fernando Nasser <fnasser@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
FN> I'd like to keep the tomcat5 package around as well, as some
FN> people may want to use the old version still. The packages have
FN> versioned names so they can be installed in parallel. Would that
FN> be OK?
I don't see why that would be a problem, although I'm not really sure
of the implications of how the parallel installations would interact
with initscripts. I guess since tomcat 5 uses "tomcat5" for its
initscript there wouldn't be any conflict, but is there any point to
running both versions at the same time?
The applications may need changes to run in a different version. Also
there are some pre-packaged things that one does not know how to
re-config but still wants to run. Last but not least, some bits are
BuildRequires and tomcat6 has a different level of the APIs. I wanted
to give people at least a release or two to adapt any dependnecies.
Also, I can't help but point out that we still really need someone
from (one of) the Java team(s) to help us write some Java guidelines.
Without guidelines, review tickets for Java packages have been piling
up, and it's taken me a lot of time just to get answers to basic
questions that have cropped up during a package review.
I ti snot the guidelines that are missing. Several Java-related stuff
have been discussed over the last couple of years. Sometimes long and
painful threads: ask Jess or Spot.
What we need is people to do the reviews. We only get volunteers when
someone is interested in a package (two cases recently). But nobody
seems to have the cycle and we cannot review the packages we own
ourselves. We need to try and get together some folks for a concentrate
effort like we did once.
Regards,
Fernando
--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
