This question made me take a fresh look at jpackage, which led me to join the #jpackage freenode IRC channel. I spoke with Jason C, Joe, and David there, and after some discussion we have agreed to collaborate more on Tomcat RPM packaging. I was unaware that jpackage also had a Tomcat 6 RPM. But, some of the features I need in a Tomcat RPM package are features that distros may not want to accept. That's fine. Jpackage RPMs are mainly for distros to include as the stock packages, and my RPM is meant to be an alternative that is more customizable, and does not conflict with the OS's pre-installed RPM package(s). After discussing a bit, we concluded that by collaborating, each of our Tomcat package implementations could benefit from experience gained by implementing and using the other implementation. In the end, both packages could improve, but probably not merge due to conflicting feature requirements. I say probably in that sentence because we've just begun discussing the details and potential solutions. We also agreed that having more than one Tomcat RPM implementation gives users the choice to decide which implementation fits their use case(s) best.
We would love to hear more feedback from users of our Tomcat RPMs, including what you'd like to see change, if anything, and/or what features you've found missing, or what features you use the most. It's difficult to know which features people want without much feedback. Thanks! -- Jason Brittain On Feb 7, 2008 11:51 PM, Henri Gomez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well and what about JPackage compatibity ? > > 2008/2/7, Jason Brittain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > People may easily change that if they'd like. But, it was a > > repeatedly requested > > change -- too many users were complaining that they weren't able to install > > other Tomcat RPMs because of dependencies they couldn't meet, and they > > wished they had a package that didn't have that "problem". They already had > > Java installed, and it wasn't necessarily installed as an RPM package, and > > it > > wasn't necessarily Sun's Java. They just wanted to set JAVA_HOME and be > > done with that. You would be surprised how many users were asking for it to > > be this way. Also, it would be easy to customize the spec file of this > > package > > and rebuild it to depend on the Java one wants it to depend on. It would be > > a 1 line change to the RPM spec file. > > > > -- > > Jason > > > > > > On Feb 7, 2008 9:58 AM, Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, 2008-02-07 at 07:42 -0800, Jason Brittain wrote: > > > > - Zero RPM package dependencies on any other RPM packages, for ease > > > > of installation as a single file (other than Java itself, which you > > > > already have). > > > > > > Hum, that last feature doesn't look so good to me :( > > > > > > Rémy > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Jason Brittain > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
