Re: Clear definition of default-java and its scope

2010-12-08 Thread Niels Thykier
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 2010-12-08 21:18, Torsten Werner wrote: > On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 8:52 PM, Matthias Klose wrote: >> No. This should not be done. Relying on an alternative for a build makes >> problems much harder to debug, if you first have to find out which >> a

Re: Clear definition of default-java and its scope

2010-12-08 Thread Torsten Werner
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 8:52 PM, Matthias Klose wrote: > No. This should not be done. Relying on an alternative for a build makes > problems much harder to debug, if you first have to find out which > alternative is actually used, and which alternative is used for the build. > > I am fine with impr

Re: Clear definition of default-java and its scope

2010-12-08 Thread Matthias Klose
On 08.12.2010 14:00, Niels Thykier wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi In light of LP: #687263 and LP: #564699 I think it might be time for us to clearly define the purpose of default-java; not only for our own sake but also for the sake of Java users on Debian(-based dist

Re: Clear definition of default-java and its scope

2010-12-08 Thread Torsten Werner
Hi Niels, On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Niels Thykier wrote: > I propose we solve this by explicitly defining default-java to hold the > two definitions I mentioned above (it is the only sane choice for > backwards compatibility as far as I can tell) and post-Squeeze introduce > a "system-defau