On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Richard Fearn wrote:
> eclipse-findbugs - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1068044
> - Eclipse plugin; continue to depend on java
FWIW I'd say the whole java* dependency is pretty much superfluous
here, eclipse-jdt should be enough.
--
devel mailing li
t.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1068255
- libraries - OK to change to java-headless
Hope this is OK...
Regards,
Rich
--
Richard Fearn
richardfe...@gmail.com
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct:
On Thu 06 Mar 2014 12:58:46 AM CET Sérgio Basto wrote:
> Hi ,
> is java-headless, jre (Java Runtime Environment) ? if not, what is the
> difference ? .
Headless is a subset of full JRE without support for some graphical operations,
sound etc (i.e. desktop features that are usually u
Hi ,
is java-headless, jre (Java Runtime Environment) ? if not, what is the
difference ? .
Thanks,
--
Sérgio M. B.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Stanislav Ochotnicky
wrote:
> Actually we are strongly considering getting rid of javadocs
> completely[1] mostly due to Java 8 problems.
If for whatever reason those problems won't be fixed, I suppose one
approach to them is passing the -Xdoclint:none flag to ja
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 2:00 AM, Stanislav Ochotnicky <
sochotni...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Actually we are strongly considering getting rid of javadocs
> completely[1] mostly due to Java 8 problems. We might be able to leave
> them be perhaps, but it's just a lot of work with uncertain
> benefits/us
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 2:19 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
> I'm all with you Ville.
> But this requires someone jumping in to do work and there is noone. We
> have to live in reality - noone is showing any interest into working on
> this :(.
I am willing to help with an effort to bring sanity
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 6:45:39 PM
> Subject: Re: Java headless bugs
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Stanislav Ochotnicky
> wrote:
> >
> > Since javadoc subpackages put files in /usr/s
Ville Skyttä writes:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Stanislav Ochotnicky
> wrote:
>>
>> Since javadoc subpackages put files in /usr/share/javadoc they must
>> require package that provides this directory.
>
> In my opinion all javadocs should be crosslinked with local JDK's
> javadocs (+ ot
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Stanislav Ochotnicky
wrote:
>
> Since javadoc subpackages put files in /usr/share/javadoc they must
> require package that provides this directory.
In my opinion all javadocs should be crosslinked with local JDK's
javadocs (+ others as appropriate) and have a dep
rg/wiki/Packaging:Java.
>>
>> Guidelines state that package must have "R: jpackage-utils" because it
>> contains filesystem (/usr/share/javadoc directory).
>
> Where does it say that? I can see this bit:
>
>> Java binary packages or their dependencies MUST ha
idelines state that package must have "R: jpackage-utils" because it
> contains filesystem (/usr/share/javadoc directory).
Where does it say that? I can see this bit:
> Java binary packages or their dependencies MUST have Requires (generated by
> RPM or manual) on:
> * java-headle
Jerry James writes:
> I've got a few comments and questions about the recently filed bugs asking
> us to switch from Requires: java to Requires: java-headless. First, the
> bugs list some web pages to view for more information. Number two on that
> list is this:
>
> ht
2014 6:31:22 PM
> Subject: Java headless bugs
>
> I've got a few comments and questions about the recently filed bugs asking us
> to switch from Requires: java to Requires: java-headless. First, the bugs
> list some web pages to view for more information. Number two on that
On 02/21/2014 09:31 AM, Jerry James wrote:
> Third, developers are offered two options in those bugs: (1) don't do anything
> and an automatic tool will make the change for you on or after March 17, or
> (2) make the change to java-headless yourself. I have one package for which I
I've got a few comments and questions about the recently filed bugs asking
us to switch from Requires: java to Requires: java-headless. First, the
bugs list some web pages to view for more information. Number two on that
list is this:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging
Quoting Florian Weimer (2013-10-28 14:42:47)
> On 10/24/2013 04:19 PM, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
> > Quoting Fernando Nasser (2013-10-24 16:06:27)
> >> Also, will this change be ackported into the Java packages of RHEL_5 and
> >> RHEL-6?
> >
> > Doesn't matter. Fedora != RHEL
>
> I think we nee
On 10/24/2013 04:19 PM, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
Quoting Fernando Nasser (2013-10-24 16:06:27)
Also, will this change be ackported into the Java packages of RHEL_5 and RHEL-6?
Doesn't matter. Fedora != RHEL
I think we need a solution for EPEL, though. Either we can ship the
non-split pa
Quoting Fernando Nasser (2013-10-24 16:06:27)
> Also, will this change be ackported into the Java packages of RHEL_5 and
> RHEL-6?
Doesn't matter. Fedora != RHEL
> Our products use only one spec file, we'll have to add lots of %if
> in our spec files (and we have 300+ of them).
Well then you c
"Jiri Vanek" , devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Cc: java-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2013 5:08:01 AM
> Subject: Re: [fedora-java] Headless JRE in Fedora
>
> Quoting Jiri Vanek (2013-10-21 18:45:46)
> > Hi all!
> >
> > With
> &g
tever (this is
> > still "on QA" on our side)
> > to swap theirs dependence to java-headless.
> > Alos, maintainers, please do not forget, that when you update your package,
> > also packages you are
> > depending on must become "just hedless dependent&qu
s version.
> During the life of F20
> (as in f21 all expected packages should be correctly headless)i would like to
> recommend all java
> packages maintainers, who do not need audio, or X or whatever (this is still
> "on QA" on our side)
> to swap theirs depende
22 matches
Mail list logo
