>>>>> "AO" == Andrew Overholt <overholt@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: AO> I thought we wrote the guidelines to make them optional. I agree AO> they should definitely be made optional at this point. The use of GCJ is currently "should" which means "unless you have a good reason not to do so". It's always been that way, and has never been interpreted by most reviewers as being optional. I can draft up a change which changes the strength of the GCJ recommendation. However, not being familiar with Java I'm not sure if we should now be recommending against GCJ, or if it's simply a "use it if you want to" thing. Akexander's message gives several reasons why we should be telling people not to use it (or at least it seems that way to me) and given that I'm having trouble understanding why we shouldn't just be saying "you should (or even must) not compile with GCJ" at this point. - J< -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
