Re: [java-gnome-hackers] Libraries vs Packaging (1): Linkage
Brought to you by:
afcowie
From: Andrew C. <an...@op...> - 2011-06-02 00:05:00
|
On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 14:19 -0300, Francisco Ortiz wrote: ... > I really like the compile-time flags proposal > ...but not include the java classes in the JAR is BIG problem from > (library) users perspective. You will end up with a non consistent API > from java side, you will have version java-gnome 4.0.20 with the > library or without it and the user will not know it. Or based on the > distro will have it or not. Same java program will throw a > ClassNotFoundException in the platform not supporting the > functionality. Yes, that's my concern exactly. We *did* have that situation in the 2.x days, because we had Cairo bindings that needed PDF support, but at the time some distros were shipping Cairo built with --enable-pdf and some were not. Made it damn near impossible to package libcairo-java at the time. And made it useless to try writing a program against it, because you [the developer] had no idea if your it would work when installed on a users' system... Pain & suffering. [There was a lot of that in the 2.x days. When I inherited java-gnome, there were 9+ upstream modules and 6+ downstream packages (that were alive). Trying to do a point release just to fix an autotools problem and then ship those packages in a distro was insanely painful. Took 9 hours, I kid you not (and people wonder why I hate automake so much)] Anyway. > Putting the topic about including non-pure-gnome dependencies aside, That actually *is* a significant engineering question. I think Serkan wants this too. We should talk about it. I'll start a new thread for that part. AfC Sydney |