From owner-freebsd-java Tue Jun 5 20:48:26 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from hotmail.com (f253.law8.hotmail.com [216.33.240.128]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FF9A37B406 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 20:48:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jmd526@hotmail.com) Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 20:48:22 -0700 Received: from 66.89.179.250 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 06 Jun 2001 03:48:21 GMT X-Originating-IP: [66.89.179.250] From: "John Daniels" To: ernst@jollem.com Cc: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: JDK ports revisited Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 23:48:21 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jun 2001 03:48:22.0066 (UTC) FILETIME=[88201920:01C0EE3B] Sender: owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Ernst de Haan wrote: >Well, this depends. There are pros and cons for both approaches. Most >people prefer not having a third digit. This group does not include me, It seems to me that three digits has the advantage of clarity and practicality. 1. Let's say you are currently using jdk 1.4.1. You update your ports tree (*), goto /java and find the the following list of jdk's (there are no versions greater than 1.4.x): jdk14 jdk14-beta jdk14-sun linux-sun-jdk14 linux-ibm-jdk14 linux-blackdown-jdk14-beta Do you have the latest version? Which one is the latest? Has your preferred jdk(s) been updated to a new version since you last downloaded it? These questions could be even more confusing to people who are not java professionals. If a professor tells his students to be sure that they have the latest jdk for the final class assignment/project (or even "make sure you use jdk 1.4.3") -- how many students will not find the lastest version because they assume that all the "jdk14"s indicate the same version? * Note: searching for "jdk" on the freebsd website is a bit better than your java directory because a short description is printed, but even some of these short descriptions only say: "Sun's Java Developers Kit" without (currently) listing the version. If all jdk descriptions are to contain the full version numbers (in the future), will the port maintainer always remember to update the description? 2. Shouldn't we accomodate the preference or need of some people for earlier versions (due to changed feature set, bugs, company standard, etc.)? At least for a short time? This is not to say that 2 digits is not the better format, I just haven't seen a discussion of issues above. A 3 digit format does not force freebsd to automatically provide all possible jdk's. Bloat might better be eliminated by policy, not the naming scheme. I'd be surprise if there was much call for any but the latest versions of the 1.1.x and 1.2.x jdk's (and in a year, only the latest 1.3.x jdk's). A hybrid approach could also be considered: two digits for older jdk's, 3 digits for the most recent one's. In that case 1.1.x and 1.2.x jdk's would now be: jdk11 and jdk12, while 1.3.x and 1.4.x jdk's would use three digit version numbers. (But this lacks consistancy) John _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message