On Wed, 20 Sep 2017 17:34:47 +0000 Chris Lamb <la...@debian.org> wrote: > lintian (2.5.53) unstable; urgency=medium > . > * Summary of tag changes: > + Added: > - package-installs-java-bytecode
Hi, Thanks for improving the Java support in Lintian, I'd suggest CCing these topics to debian-j...@lists.debian.org to gather more feedback on the proposed changes. I got a look at the packages affected by the new package-installs-java-bytecode tag [1], they mostly consist in demos/examples, webapp classes or one-class programs not meant to be re-used as libraries. For these cases installing .class files directly in the binary package is legitimate I think. jar files are really important for reusable libraries and large applications (since jar files are more space efficient), but there is no harm shipping a few isolated .class files. The Java Policy probably needs a clarification on this point. As I understand Carnë was concerned about .class files in the upstream tarballs not recompiled from source and installed as-is in the binary packages. I was under the impression this case was already covered by source-contains-prebuilt-java-object but it isn't. I agree it would be nice to handle this. So I suggest the following: - modify source-contains-prebuilt-java-object to also detect .class files - lower the severity of package-installs-java-bytecode to pendatic or info - trigger package-installs-java-bytecode in non-library packages only when the number of classes detected in the package exceeds 20. - do not trigger package-installs-java-bytecode if the path contains "WEB-INF", "demo", "doc", "example", "sample" or "test". - strictly speaking a class file isn't raw bytecode instructions, so maybe rename the tag to "package-installs-java-class-files". - verify if the .class files are really Java class files (by checking the 0xCAFEBABE header, this will avoid false positives like apertium-eo-fr and grass-core). Emmanuel Bourg [1] https://lintian.debian.org/tags/package-installs-java-bytecode.html
