On Monday 25 of January 2016 13:07:09 Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> On Monday 25 of January 2016 14:46:14 Vladimir Sitnikov wrote:
> > Pavel> there is no demand for that package in Linux
> >
> > Pease, read again:
> > Vladimir>add one more build step: download relevant
> > Vladimir>sources, build them
> >
> > Where do you see "adding new package" there?
>
> Right, I missed that, sorry. But this requires new package -- it is new
> upstream, new license -- I do not want to cross the border of
> "good packagers group"..
>
> pgjdbc-parent-poms are (probably) fine, because it is the same upstream as
> pgjdbc, has the same license -- and to be honest, I guess those two git
> repositories will be merged into one git and tarball in future anyway. If
> not, pgjdbc main repo could be made self-standing sooner or later.
>
> And similarly to osgi stuff, there is no demand for the separate package
> existence.
I also don't see the primary source -- is this osgi.enterprise code
expected to be freely redistributed? Even if yes, I'm against taking the
packaging responsibilities on our database-team. Nobody else needs it and
we are not the right people to take care about it :(
Pavel
