[pkg-jboss-maintainer] Re: Bug#238411: ITP: JBoss -- J2EE based application server

[Philipp Hug]

jboss-core is just the jboss/bin and jboss/lib folder with an almost empt=
y
jboss-service.xml. ;-)
I guess we should include the minimal configuration in the core as it
contains log4j, jndi the deployment scanner... and I guess everyone wants
that.

tomcat: the tomcat package is a sar (Service Archive) and this is not j2e=
e
compliant. It's a jboss specific thing.

philipp

----- Original Message -----=20
From: "Daniel Ruoso" <daniel@ruoso.com>
To: "Konstantinos Margaritis" <markos@debian.gr>
Cc: "Philipp Hug" <philipp@hug.cx>;
<pkg-jboss-maintainer@lists.alioth.debian.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2004 2:07 PM
Subject: Re: Bug#238411: ITP: JBoss -- J2EE based application server


> Em Sex, 2004-03-26 =E0s 16:30, Konstantinos Margaritis escreveu:
> > (cc'ing to the list as well, just a test)
> Well, you forgot the -request at the address, I'm cc'ing to test as you
tried.
>
> >   I just did a checkout. As I see it we have a few alternatives in
> > packaging this beast:
> > 1. package everything in a single package (not really my idea)
> > 2. make groups of packages (how and which should be discussed),
> >     perhaps use the minimal/default/all package grouping?
> > 3. package each directory in each own package:
>
> Well, there is one thing that is clear... at this moment we have 1
> source package, so I think we could put into the "jboss" package,
> everything that it absolutely depends on to run (excluding thirdparty
> that should be packaged in separate). I personally don't know what make=
s
> the jboss's core. The other parts could be packaged one-by-one, in a wa=
y
> the user can choose what to install.
>
> > First of all, I think that we're going to have a licensing problem. I=
n
> > the thirdparty folder, there are some sun jars, which I doubt are
> > DFSG free. What I mean, even if we ever manage to run jboss with gij,
> > or sablevm, kaffe, whatever, so that we don't have to depend on j2sdk
> > from sun, even then the inclusion of the thirdparty non-free software
> > in the source package, could pose problems. But please, correct me if
> > I'm wrong.
>
> Yes, you're right... Probably jboss will remain in contrib for a long
> time...
>
> > Also, we have tomcat41 and tomcat5 folders. Which one do we build by
> > default (both and offer conflicting packages)?
>
> Tomcat is already packaged, I think we should use the version packaged.
> maybe ask the maintainer to create a tomcat4-embedded (that conflicts
> with tomcat4) package which would install tomcat into jboss deploy...
> (actually not jboss, but inside any j2ee app server)
>
> > Also, I think I might try to run jboss using some free java vm (gij,
> > sablevm, kaffe) so that we might not need to depend on a Sun JDK.
>
> Agreed.
>
>
> daniel
>
>
>