On Thu Jul 16 22:42, Torsten Werner wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Matthew Johnson wrote:
> > I've arranged for a Debian Java BOF at Debconf this year which I know many
> > people won't be at, so I'd like to have some sort of pre-discussion first.
>
> thanks for organizing the BOF and I
Hi Matthew,
On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Matthew Johnson wrote:
> I've arranged for a Debian Java BOF at Debconf this year which I know many
> people won't be at, so I'd like to have some sort of pre-discussion first.
thanks for organizing the BOF and I will be there. I currently do not
have
Matthew Johnson wrote:
> I've arranged for a Debian Java BOF at Debconf this year which I know many
> people won't be at, so I'd like to have some sort of pre-discussion first.
>
> There are a number of issues I'd like to try and sort out with packaging
> policy, and actually try and get them bak
On Sun Jul 12 21:37, Johan Henriksson wrote:
> > I think we should mandate one of the standardised ways of doing dependency
> > resolution so that in most cases application writers don't need to maintain
> > recursive classpaths; java -jar should work and therefore jarwrapper can be
> > used to avo
> I think we should mandate one of the standardised ways of doing dependency
> resolution so that in most cases application writers don't need to maintain
> recursive classpaths; java -jar should work and therefore jarwrapper can be
> used to avoid writing any wrapper at all (In fact, -jar doesn't
Dear Debian Java packagers,
I've arranged for a Debian Java BOF at Debconf this year which I know many
people won't be at, so I'd like to have some sort of pre-discussion first.
There are a number of issues I'd like to try and sort out with packaging
policy, and actually try and get them baked in
6 matches
Mail list logo
