On 02/24/2015 04:06 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
> * Mikolaj Izdebski <mizdebsk(a)redhat.com> [2015-02-24 09:58]:
>> On 02/24/2015 03:32 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
>>> * Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik(a)greysector.net>
[2015-02-24 09:29]:
>>>> On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 15:09, Deepak Bhole wrote:
>>>>> * Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
<dominik(a)greysector.net> [2015-02-24 09:04]:
>>>>>> On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 14:28, Jiri Vanek wrote:
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> There were several attempts in past like "can you
please support jdk
>>>>>>> 7,6...in newer fedoras" and we always told no. When
come speech about "do it
>>>>>>> on your own" suddenly many questions marks raised up.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The last open bug is:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1190137
>>>>>>> the guy is willing to maintain it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fine, so let him do it and drop the Obsoletes: tag in
java-1.8.0-openjdk
>>>>>> and its successors. You shouldn't arbitrarily block people
from
>>>>>> re-introducing an older branch of any package back into Fedora
in the
>>>>>> first place.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We have no intention of blocking it. The reason for proposing these
>>>>> restrictions is that the Fedora Java stack will not work with older
>>>>> JDKs, therefore we need to make sure that it goes not get installed
on
>>>>> the system unless explicitly requested by someone who knows what
they
>>>>> are doing.
>>>>
>>>> Well, you do that by adding/updating (Build)Requires: in the packages
>>>> which won't work otherwise, not by adding Obsoletes:.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That would generally work for most packages, but there is a new JDK
>>> released every 2 years. This means that we would have to change the BR
>>> and Requires for the entire Java stack (100s and 100s of packages) every
>>> 2 years, which is non-trivial.
>>
>> First, we have versioned auto-requires generated during package build.
>> Explicit requires on java aren't usually needed. If package requires
>> "java > 1:1.7" then it is correct - the package can be assumed to
work
>> with older JDK.
>>
>
> While that is true in terms of source compatibility, it will work only
> if it is compiled with the older JDK.
>
>> Secondly, it is fairly easy to add requires on "java-devel >=
1:1.8" to
>> packages related to build systems like ant, maven or gradle. This would
>> cover most cases of building Java packages using latest JDK.
>>
>
> As you stated, it will cover most cases, but not all. More critically,
> this does not solve the issue with requirement of 'java' itself.
These few remaining cases can be easily handled by provenpackager as
mass-change.
Also, my proposal of introducing "java" metapackage (see my other post
in this thread), which would always require the latest JDK, solves this
problem in a different way, without modifying ordinary Java packages at all.
Ah, I had missed that. Yes, the metapackage solution should work to the
same effect. I don't know if we can just call it 'java' though, unless
you are proposing that 'java' provision be removed from current openjdk
packages?
Deepak
--
Mikolaj Izdebski
Software Engineer, Red Hat
IRC: mizdebsk
--
devel mailing list
devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct:
http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct