On 07/25/2010 07:14 PM, Peter Lewis wrote:

Hi,

On Sunday 25 Jul 2010 at 16:50 Guillaume ALAUX wrote:

...

I also have some suggestions for these packages: - rename them from {jre,jdk} to {java6-sun-jre,java6-sun-jdk} or so would enable us to use different versions of SUN's JVM (Java5, 6 and 7)

Well the open jdk package is called "openjdk6". It would be nice if all the similar packages had similar names, to make it obvious that they were alternatives.

So if you want to rename them, how about either calling them sunjdk6 and sunjre6 or else renaming the open ones too to fit into the same scheme, e.g. java6-open-jdk? Although this has the down side that it no longer contains the phrase "openjdk" which is probably what some/most people search for.

Just a thought.

Pete.

i always hatted the debian naming scheme for java so -1 from me. but i'm not against to use upstream name. -- Ionuț

On 07/25/2010 07:37 PM, Guillaume ALAUX wrote:

On 25 July 2010 18:17, Ionuț Bîru wrote:

...

On 07/25/2010 07:14 PM, Peter Lewis wrote:

...

Hi,

On Sunday 25 Jul 2010 at 16:50 Guillaume ALAUX wrote:

...

I also have some suggestions for these packages: - rename them from {jre,jdk} to {java6-sun-jre,java6-sun-jdk} or so would enable us to use different versions of SUN's JVM (Java5, 6 and 7)

Well the open jdk package is called "openjdk6". It would be nice if all the similar packages had similar names, to make it obvious that they were alternatives.

So if you want to rename them, how about either calling them sunjdk6 and sunjre6 or else renaming the open ones too to fit into the same scheme, e.g. java6-open-jdk? Although this has the down side that it no longer contains the phrase "openjdk" which is probably what some/most people search for.

Just a thought.

Pete.

i always hatted the debian naming scheme for java so -1 from me. but i'm not against to use upstream name.

-- Ionuț

Well there are several reasons in this renaming proposal :

1) to add some more info about the package 2) to make the difference between versions of Java. ie if we include the "6" in names we could have (in a shorter scheme) jdk6 and jre6, jdk5 and jre5, jdk7 and jre7. Because nowadays, upgrading jre from 6 to 7 would un-install jre v6. As you all know these different versions of JVM (5 and 6 and tomorrow 7) are both used a lot !

well, when this happens be sure that we will do that. add a new jre6 and jdk package when version 7 is released

...

i always hatted the debian naming scheme for java so -1 from me. but i'm not against to use upstream name What about splitting the PKGBUILD?

+1

...

So if you want to rename them, how about either calling them sunjdk6 and sunjre6 or else renaming the open ones too to fit into the same scheme, e.g. java6-open-jdk I do agree.

the description of jre/jdk are pretty damn straight an if you really search for java sun it would find jre/jdk pacman -Ss java sun -- Ionuț

On 25 July 2010 19:02, Guillaume ALAUX wrote:

On 25 July 2010 18:45, Ionuț Bîru wrote:

...

On 07/25/2010 07:37 PM, Guillaume ALAUX wrote:

...

On 25 July 2010 18:17, Ionuț Bîru wrote:

On 07/25/2010 07:14 PM, Peter Lewis wrote:

...

Hi,

...

On Sunday 25 Jul 2010 at 16:50 Guillaume ALAUX wrote:

I also have some suggestions for these packages:

...

- rename them from {jre,jdk} to {java6-sun-jre,java6-sun-jdk} or so would enable us to use different versions of SUN's JVM (Java5, 6 and 7)

Well the open jdk package is called "openjdk6". It would be nice if all the similar packages had similar names, to make it obvious that they were alternatives.

So if you want to rename them, how about either calling them sunjdk6 and sunjre6 or else renaming the open ones too to fit into the same scheme, e.g. java6-open-jdk? Although this has the down side that it no longer contains the phrase "openjdk" which is probably what some/most people search for.

Just a thought.

Pete.

i always hatted the debian naming scheme for java so -1 from me. but i'm not against to use upstream name.

-- Ionuț

Well there are several reasons in this renaming proposal :

1) to add some more info about the package 2) to make the difference between versions of Java. ie if we include the "6" in names we could have (in a shorter scheme) jdk6 and jre6, jdk5 and jre5, jdk7 and jre7. Because nowadays, upgrading jre from 6 to 7 would un-install jre v6. As you all know these different versions of JVM (5 and 6 and tomorrow 7) are both used a lot !

well, when this happens be sure that we will do that. add a new jre6 and jdk package when version 7 is released

...

i always hatted the debian naming scheme for java so -1 from me. but i'm

...

not against to use upstream name What about splitting the PKGBUILD?

+1

...

So if you want to rename them, how about either calling them sunjdk6 and

...

sunjre6 or else renaming the open ones too to fit into the same scheme, e.g. java6-open-jdk I do agree.

the description of jre/jdk are pretty damn straight an if you really search for java sun it would find jre/jdk

pacman -Ss java sun

-- Ionuț

...

well, when this happens be sure that we will do that. add a new jre6 and jdk package when version 7 is released I see your point: jdk beeing the "current" version and jdk5 or jdk7 alternatives like Peter said.

What about paths? Today jdk/jre install in /opt/java, openjdk6 installs in /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk. Wouldn't it be cleaner if we installed jdk/jre files in /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-sun-{jdk,jre} or something?

OK tested ! So! Basically, I made 2 versions of the package: 1) this onehttp://github.com/downloads/galaux/abs/java-sun-6u21-1.src.tar.gz_current is made of the PKGBUILDs of JRE and JDK from community merged and updated 2) this onehttp://github.com/downloads/galaux/abs/java-sun-6u21-1.src.tar.gz_custom is the same as 1) but I removed the construct.sh script and directly included it into the PKGBUILD so that we don't have to get through a lot of unnecessary lines of script for building. This doesn't bring a lot but looks cleaner to me so... may not be that relevant ! Names are unchanged, ie jdk and jre. Paths are unchanged ie /opt/java/{,jre} Both have been tested for 32 and 64 arch and compile with openjdk6 and jre/jdk. If a dev wants to use/test for official use in Arch repo Guillaume

On 29 July 2010 16:42, Ionuț Bîru wrote:

On 07/29/2010 12:34 AM, Guillaume ALAUX wrote:

...

On 25 July 2010 19:02, Guillaume ALAUX wrote:

On 25 July 2010 18:45, Ionuț Bîru wrote:

...

On 07/25/2010 07:37 PM, Guillaume ALAUX wrote:

...

On 25 July 2010 18:17, Ionuț Bîru wrote:

...

On 07/25/2010 07:14 PM, Peter Lewis wrote:

...

Hi,

> > On Sunday 25 Jul 2010 at 16:50 Guillaume ALAUX wrote: > > I also have some suggestions for these packages: > >> - rename them from {jre,jdk} to {java6-sun-jre,java6-sun-jdk} or so >> would >> enable us to use different versions of SUN's JVM (Java5, 6 and 7) >> >> >> Well the open jdk package is called "openjdk6". It would be nice if > all > the > similar packages had similar names, to make it obvious that they were > alternatives. > > So if you want to rename them, how about either calling them sunjdk6 > and > sunjre6 or else renaming the open ones too to fit into the same > scheme, > e.g. > java6-open-jdk? Although this has the down side that it no longer > contains > the > phrase "openjdk" which is probably what some/most people search for. > > Just a thought. > > Pete. > > > i always hatted the debian naming scheme for java so -1 from me. but i'm not against to use upstream name.

-- Ionuț

Well there are several reasons in this renaming proposal :

1) to add some more info about the package 2) to make the difference between versions of Java. ie if we include the "6" in names we could have (in a shorter scheme) jdk6 and jre6, jdk5 and jre5, jdk7 and jre7. Because nowadays, upgrading jre from 6 to 7 would un-install jre v6. As you all know these different versions of JVM (5 and 6 and tomorrow 7) are both used a lot !

well, when this happens be sure that we will do that. add a new jre6 and jdk package when version 7 is released

i always hatted the debian naming scheme for java so -1 from me. but

...

i'm

...

not against to use upstream name

What about splitting the PKGBUILD?

+1

So if you want to rename them, how about either calling them sunjdk6

...

and

...

sunjre6 or else renaming the open ones too to fit into the same

scheme, e.g. java6-open-jdk I do agree.

the description of jre/jdk are pretty damn straight an if you really search for java sun it would find jre/jdk

pacman -Ss java sun

-- Ionuț

well, when this happens be sure that we will do that. add a new jre6 and

...

jdk package when version 7 is released I see your point: jdk beeing the "current" version and jdk5 or jdk7 alternatives like Peter said.

What about paths? Today jdk/jre install in /opt/java, openjdk6 installs in /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk. Wouldn't it be cleaner if we installed jdk/jre files in /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-sun-{jdk,jre} or something?

OK tested !

So! Basically, I made 2 versions of the package:

1) this one< http://github.com/downloads/galaux/abs/java-sun-6u21-1.src.tar.gz_current

...

is made of the PKGBUILDs of JRE and JDK from community merged and updated 2) this one< http://github.com/downloads/galaux/abs/java-sun-6u21-1.src.tar.gz_custom>

is the same as 1) but I removed the construct.sh script and directly included it into the PKGBUILD so that we don't have to get through a lot of unnecessary lines of script for building. This doesn't bring a lot but looks cleaner to me so... may not be that relevant !

Names are unchanged, ie jdk and jre. Paths are unchanged ie /opt/java/{,jre}

Both have been tested for 32 and 64 arch and compile with openjdk6 and jre/jdk. If a dev wants to use/test for official use in Arch repo

Guillaume

thanks for this. i'll add it later today as Dan is kinda inactive

-- Ionuț

I have pretty much the same request about Tomcat... should I wait for Dan to get back in business? -- Guillaume

On 29 July 2010 17:33, Ionuț Bîru wrote:

On 07/29/2010 05:57 PM, Guillaume ALAUX wrote:

...

On 29 July 2010 16:42, Ionuț Bîru wrote:

On 07/29/2010 12:34 AM, Guillaume ALAUX wrote:

...

On 25 July 2010 19:02, Guillaume ALAUX wrote:

...

On 25 July 2010 18:45, Ionuț Bîru wrote:

...

On 07/25/2010 07:37 PM, Guillaume ALAUX wrote:

...

On 25 July 2010 18:17, Ionuț Bîru wrote:

> > On 07/25/2010 07:14 PM, Peter Lewis wrote: > > >> Hi, >> >> >>> On Sunday 25 Jul 2010 at 16:50 Guillaume ALAUX wrote: >>> >>> I also have some suggestions for these packages: >>> >>> - rename them from {jre,jdk} to {java6-sun-jre,java6-sun-jdk} or >>>> so >>>> would >>>> enable us to use different versions of SUN's JVM (Java5, 6 and 7) >>>> >>>> >>>> Well the open jdk package is called "openjdk6". It would be nice >>>> if >>>> >>> all >>> the >>> similar packages had similar names, to make it obvious that they >>> were >>> alternatives. >>> >>> So if you want to rename them, how about either calling them >>> sunjdk6 >>> and >>> sunjre6 or else renaming the open ones too to fit into the same >>> scheme, >>> e.g. >>> java6-open-jdk? Although this has the down side that it no longer >>> contains >>> the >>> phrase "openjdk" which is probably what some/most people search >>> for. >>> >>> Just a thought. >>> >>> Pete. >>> >>> >>> i always hatted the debian naming scheme for java so -1 from me. >>> but >>> >> i'm >> not against to use upstream name. >> >> -- >> Ionuț >> >> >> Well there are several reasons in this renaming proposal : >> > > 1) to add some more info about the package > 2) to make the difference between versions of Java. ie if we include > the > "6" > in names we could have (in a shorter scheme) jdk6 and jre6, jdk5 and > jre5, > jdk7 and jre7. Because nowadays, upgrading jre from 6 to 7 would > un-install > jre v6. As you all know these different versions of JVM (5 and 6 and > tomorrow 7) are both used a lot ! > > > well, when this happens be sure that we will do that. add a new jre6 and jdk package when version 7 is released

i always hatted the debian naming scheme for java so -1 from me. but

> i'm > > >> not against to use upstream name >> > What about splitting the PKGBUILD? > > > +1

So if you want to rename them, how about either calling them sunjdk6

> and > > >> sunjre6 or else renaming the open ones too to fit into the same >> > scheme, > e.g. > java6-open-jdk > I do agree. > > > the description of jre/jdk are pretty damn straight an if you really search for java sun it would find jre/jdk

pacman -Ss java sun

-- Ionuț

well, when this happens be sure that we will do that. add a new jre6

and

...

jdk package when version 7 is released

I see your point: jdk beeing the "current" version and jdk5 or jdk7 alternatives like Peter said.

What about paths? Today jdk/jre install in /opt/java, openjdk6 installs in /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk. Wouldn't it be cleaner if we installed jdk/jre files in /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-sun-{jdk,jre} or something?

OK tested !

So! Basically, I made 2 versions of the package:

1) this one<

http://github.com/downloads/galaux/abs/java-sun-6u21-1.src.tar.gz_current

...

is made of the PKGBUILDs of JRE and JDK from community merged and updated 2) this one< http://github.com/downloads/galaux/abs/java-sun-6u21-1.src.tar.gz_custom

...

is the same as 1) but I removed the construct.sh script and directly included it into the PKGBUILD so that we don't have to get through a lot of unnecessary lines of script for building. This doesn't bring a lot but looks cleaner to me so... may not be that relevant !

Names are unchanged, ie jdk and jre. Paths are unchanged ie /opt/java/{,jre}

Both have been tested for 32 and 64 arch and compile with openjdk6 and jre/jdk. If a dev wants to use/test for official use in Arch repo

Guillaume

thanks for this. i'll add it later today as Dan is kinda inactive

-- Ionuț

I have pretty much the same request about Tomcat... should I wait for Dan to get back in business?

-- Guillaume

send me everything

-- Ionuț

Hi Ionuț, I just need to test one last thing on x64 when at home on Sunday and will send it right away. Thanks

On 31 July 2010 11:51, Ionuț Bîru wrote:

On 07/31/2010 12:22 PM, ALAUX, Guillaume wrote:

I have pretty much the same request about Tomcat... should I wait for Dan

...

...

...

to get back in business?

send me everything

Hi Ionuț,

I just need to test one last thing on x64 when at home on Sunday and will send it right away.

Thanks

are you updating to the new stable series?

-- Ionuț

The 5.5.30 yes. Well actually the update is hardly just a version change. You can already get it here and use ithttp://github.com/galaux/abs/blob/master/tomcat_current/PKGBUILD . I would also like to propose this "new" package "tomcat-admin"http://github.com/galaux/abs/tree/master/tomcat_current-adminthat provides the administration webapp. These have been tested on i686 and x64. The last things I wanted to test are not related to these PKGBUILDs but to some changes I would like to propose. I could maybe post these later when tested. -- Guillaume

On 31 July 2010 12:23, Ionuț Bîru wrote:

On 07/31/2010 01:08 PM, ALAUX, Guillaume wrote:

...

On 31 July 2010 11:51, Ionuț Bîru wrote:

On 07/31/2010 12:22 PM, ALAUX, Guillaume wrote:

...

I have pretty much the same request about Tomcat... should I wait for Dan

...

to

...

...

get back in business?

send me everything

Hi Ionuț,

I just need to test one last thing on x64 when at home on Sunday and will send it right away.

Thanks

are you updating to the new stable series?

-- Ionuț

The 5.5.30 yes.

Well actually the update is hardly just a version change. You can already get it here and use ithttp://github.com/galaux/abs/blob/master/tomcat_current/PKGBUILD .

done

I would also like to propose this "new" package

...

"tomcat-admin"< http://github.com/galaux/abs/tree/master/tomcat_current-admin>that

provides the administration webapp. These have been tested on i686 and x64.

upload it in aur and if it gets enough votes maybe somebody will move it into community.

-- Ionuț

upload it in aur and if it gets enough votes maybe somebody will move it into community. Hum... I should have thought about that ! There it ishttp://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=39306 .

Thanks.