| 1 |
I guess another point to consider is the complexity the maintainer faces |
| 2 |
which compiling non-trivial java items. Build configuration and |
| 3 |
compilation in the java world is not as refined as what autotools |
| 4 |
provide for native compiled items. The build procedure for java items |
| 5 |
differs from one item to the next... Though Ant does seem to becoming a |
| 6 |
standard way to build, it doesn't address build configuration well. imho |
| 7 |
anyway. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
On Sun, 2002-02-03 at 12:33, Matthew Kennedy wrote: |
| 10 |
> So might this be the rule of thumb: If some Java application/binary is |
| 11 |
> already available from the authors site in both binary and source form, |
| 12 |
> and the author provides a binary build frequently and reliably, then use |
| 13 |
> the binary from the ebuild? |
Archives