[pkg-jboss-maintainer] Re: Bug#238411: ITP: JBoss -- J2EEbased application server

[Philipp Hug]

> ok, but we still can depend on libtomcat4-java package, right?
well, we'd need to mess with the classloader, but it could work ;-)

philipp
----- Original Message -----=20
From: "Daniel Ruoso" <daniel@ruoso.com>
To: "Philipp Hug" <debian@hug.cx>
Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2004 2:22 PM
Subject: Re: [pkg-jboss-maintainer] Re: Bug#238411: ITP: JBoss -- J2EEbas=
ed
application server


> Em S=E1b, 2004-03-27 =E0s 10:17, Philipp Hug escreveu:
> > jboss-core is just the jboss/bin and jboss/lib folder with an almost
empty
> > 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.
>
> agreed.
>
> > tomcat: the tomcat package is a sar (Service Archive) and this is not
j2ee
> > compliant. It's a jboss specific thing.
>
> ok, but we still can depend on libtomcat4-java package, right?
>
> > 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 i=
n
> > > > 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 thirdpar=
ty
> > > that should be packaged in separate). I personally don't know what
makes
> > > the jboss's core. The other parts could be packaged one-by-one, in =
a
way
> > > the user can choose what to install.
> > >
> > > > First of all, I think that we're going to have a licensing proble=
m.
In
> > > > 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 m=
e
if
> > > > I'm wrong.
> > >
> > > Yes, you're right... Probably jboss will remain in contrib for a lo=
ng
> > > 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 conflic=
ts
> > > 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 (g=
ij,
> > > > sablevm, kaffe) so that we might not need to depend on a Sun JDK.
> > >
> > > Agreed.
> > >
> > >
> > > daniel
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > pkg-jboss-maintainer mailing list
> > pkg-jboss-maintainer@lists.alioth.debian.org
> > http://haydn.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-jboss-maintainer
>
>
>