On Tuesday 11 September 2001 13:11, Marcus Crafter wrote: > On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Andrew Pimlott wrote: > > I tend to agree that the name java2-virtual-machine is a little > > misleading and perhaps silly (a remnant from when "virtual machine" > > was a hot buzzword). Perhaps something like java2-runtime? > > java2-runtime is fine with me. My only concern is that it differs from > the pre set standard java-virtual-machine. > > If we go ahead with java2-runtime I would advocate obsoleting > java-virtual-machine in favour of java(1?)-runtime for java1 packages. > I think it's important to keep things consistent. I agree. And since we are rather close to a freeze, a policy change does not sounds a good thing... Can everyone approve with java2-virtual-machine for Woody and java[2]-runtime for Sid? Egon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Marcus Crafter
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Juergen Kreileder
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Egon Willighagen
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Ben Burton
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Stephen Zander
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Ben Burton
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Andrew Pimlott
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Ben Burton
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Ola Lundqvist
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Marcus Crafter
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Egon Willighagen
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Ola Lundqvist
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Marcus Crafter
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Ola Lundqvist
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Ben Burton
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Stephen Zander
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Ben Burton
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Ben Burton
- Re: Packages that require Java 2 ? Tom Tromey