Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
On 04/20/2012 01:58 PM, Ludwig Nussel wrote:
[...] - how likely is it that we are going to patch an upstream java library or application ourselves, rather than updating it to an upstream release that fixes the issue ? * very few in this project are fluent with java * is it an issue to push a newer version to fix rather than backporting changes/patches for those packages ? Well, just recently we had the case where a fix was only a few lines but the package couldn't be rebuilt from java source and upstream only offered a major version update. That sucks. It's embarrassing if a package is flagged as free software but you can't actually fix it. If at all exceptions should be granted only on a case by case basis after thorough review. Also such packages should not be put in
Pascal Bleser wrote: the oss tree.
How about if we create a new tree for those Java applications? I think we should not use NonFree since this would confuse users, that they use non free software.
There is no usable source, you can't fix bugs in the code yourself and you probably don't even know what license that random dump of bundled jars has. Calling it non-free is the closest match. cu Ludwig -- (o_ Ludwig Nussel //\ V_/_ http://www.suse.de/ SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org