| 1 |
On 08/21/2013 05:59 PM, Jean-Christophe Bach wrote: |
| 2 |
> * hasufell <hasufell@g.o> [21.08.2013. @16:48:10 +0200]: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> On 08/20/2013 05:12 PM, Randy Westlund wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> I've heard several people mention jitsi, but was surprised to find that it's not in the portage tree. |
| 6 |
>>> |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> Jitsi is written in java and thus by design buggy, bloated and hard to |
| 9 |
>> maintain. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> What a categorical opinion! Developers are writing code and are making |
| 12 |
> bugs, whatever the language they use. I am pretty sure I am able to |
| 13 |
> write buggy, bloated and hard to maintain with Haskell, Ada, Java or any |
| 14 |
> other language… |
| 15 |
> It is really easy to criticize the programming language instead of |
| 16 |
> reviewing the development methods. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> The main problem of writing an ebuild for a Java application comes from |
| 19 |
> bad habits in the Java world: people are usually distributing all |
| 20 |
> libraries and the program in a big ball of mud. It is great for Windows |
| 21 |
> users or for users who do not use a real packages manager, but it needs |
| 22 |
> lot of work to have clean packages. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Regards, |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> JC |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
The average java application is buggy, bloated and hard to maintain. And |
| 30 |
that is a fact you have to realize as a distributor. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
The programming language "java" is another topic and it sucks too, but |
| 33 |
yes... you might be able to write non-buggy code. |
Archives