[aur-general] Java name guideliness

[Pablo Lezaeta Reyes]

If look to the pther packages (not java) the fewers who need a version they
apend the versión at the endm so for consistency whit the all others
packages I think is better keep the version at the end:
<vendor>-<jre/jdk>-<version>: oracle/openjdk-jre-7/8

2014-09-11 13:41 GMT-03:00 Det <nimetonmaili at gmail.com>:

> More input.
>
> On 09/09/14 23:08, Justin Dray wrote:
> > Part of the issue here however is that now there are both jre7 and
> > jre7-oracle and so on duplicate packages in the AUR.
>
> Yes, but why are you bringing that up as an "issue", as we are trying to
> decide exactly which one to keep before just removing the other. I think
> you know neither I nor the maintainers were never for leaving both - we
> just don't, at this point, know which one.
>
> I mean, isn't that like saying:
>
> A: We need to figure out the right type of fuel for this car.
> B: Yes, but the issue is the car doesn't move.
> A: Well. Yeah..
>
> On 10/09/14 01:20, Pablo Lezaeta Reyes wrote:
> > Refusal is what happend when two or more not agree in something I never
> > mention who is refusing who cause both side from the vewpoint of the
> other
> > is refusing the other side of view.
>
> Who is refusing whom?
>
> > One not want use the other guidelines, so using the bare meaning of
> refusal
> > that mean not accdept the other.
>
> But you see you hit the problem right there. We don't _have_ a guideline
> for the naming. That's what the debate is about: we are trying to establish
> one.
>
> >> or "this is sick".
> > Maybe you are overreacting (or I not expresed it corretly), I mean that
> is
> > no sane (synonimous of ill synonimos of sick)
>
> Ok. Just use "makes no sense".
>
> > I thing that is bvous that all are java. so why not something like
> > <provider><jre/jdk>-<version>: openjdk-9 or oraclejdk-7.
>
> The names in the official repos are "jre/jdk8-openjdk", so that's why the
> previous suggestion was "jre/jdk8-oracle". However, I believe it should be
> pretty obvious which one you're dealing with, if a package is named just
> "jre" or "jdk" (isn't that the ultimate "KISS"?).
>
> The "java-" prefix is used for "archlinux-java" (extra/java-common), and
> already decided upstream. That I would refuse to divert from.
>
> On 10/09/14 08:38, P. A. López-Valencia wrote:
> > My opinion is that the AUR should follow the example set by the Arch
> > Linux developers in the extra repository and everything else must go,
> > starting with the jdk/jre pair as clarity trumps over brevity in naming
>
> Explained above. As far as I know in all the years I maintained these
> things, nobody ever confused them with OpenJDK, because that's always
> mentioned.
>
> On 10/09/14 07:43, Rafael Ferreira wrote:
> > +1 for 'java-8-jdk' and 'java-8-jre' is a good name. Just would be
> > nice to have the word "Oracle" in the description, so a "yaourt -Ss
> > oracle" could easily track your package.
>
> I agree. Added.
>
>
> Again, to summarize the Java "guidelines":
>
> Package name: <project name><version>-<"vendor"> (e.g. jdk8-openjdk,
> jre7-openjdk)
>
> "archlinux-java" name: java-<version>-<"vendor">(/jre) (e.g.
> java-8-openjdk, java-7-openjdk/jre)
>
>
> And what I support for AUR (same as what we had before):
>
> Package name: <project name>(<version>) (e.g. jdk, jre7)
>
> "archlinux-java" name: java-<version>-<project name>(/jre) (e.g.
> java-8-jdk, java-7-jre/jre) (just java-7-jre unsupported by
> "archlinux-java")
>
>
>                     Det
>



-- 
*Pablo Lezaeta*