• Diff for "Teams/JavaDebconf9"

There is a BoF about java packaging at 11am UTC+2:00. It won't be video'd, but we will have people on #debian-java on oftc if anyone else wants to contribute.

I sent an email to the list to try and get opinions in advance, here is a short agenda summarising that email. Please do put other things on here.

Agenda

• Actually merging the changes from the FOSDEM draft

• Packaging tools we need (see javahelper)

• Recursive classpath detection
• Other transition issues
• Executable jars / wrappers
• jar and wrapper locations
• Multiarch issues
  • /usr/lib/jvm
  • /usr/lib/jni
  • multi-arch depends

• Maven in Debian (Java/MavenBuilder, Java/MavenRepoHelper, Java/MavenRepoSpec)

• OpenJDK
• Jigsaw
• major packaging projects: spring, jboss, glassfish, ...
• getting more contributers, cooperation with Ubuntu

Random notes

• Maybe we want a jh_classpath so we can move between ways of doing transitive classpaths more easily, rather than just jh_manifest (I've just added this to javahelper)

Notes from first session

Java/Draft:

• Java libraries - don't depend on runtimes for libraries, but extend debian/control for classfile version - default build (via ant options / jh_build default) to java 5 bytecode - happy with the rest
• GCJ-native - fine
• Javadoc - javadoc in /usr/share/doc/package/api even if it's in package-doc - non-doc packages don't depend on classpath-doc - depends/links not in policy but best practice
• Tests - don't specify 'junit' just 'automated tests - test failures cause package build fail based on env var?
• arch-dependent jars - fine

Recursive classpath detection:

• - we want it, but should be compatible with osgi/jigsaw (tools to fix it all up)

Transitions:

• - doing 'sonames' with file/package naming and so on is generally a good idea, but there are some concerns about extra dev packages for the unversioned link and the work in checking for upstream transitions which they don't announce