jetty6 vs jetty as a package name

Michael Koch konqueror at
Sun Jul 26 14:00:52 UTC 2009

On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 02:31:19PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Michael Koch wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 12:33:45PM +0200, Torsten Werner wrote:
> >> The discussion is probably over because jetty 6.1.19-1 has been
> >> accepted into experimental. But we can still call the next major
> >> version jetty7.
> > 
> > As long as jetty 6.x is not in unstable nothing is decided. Its still
> > possible to do jetty 5.x uploads to unstable and upload jetty6 6.x to
> > unstable too.
> OK, let me know what your final decision is on how it will be named once
> it reaches unstable. It will affect the name of the package I'll soon
> upload to Ubuntu to provide Jetty6 libraries to Eucalyptus. It will
> still make a much simpler sync in the future if it were called jetty6,
> but it's still your decision :)

Personally I see the is as another reason to name it jetty6 as collaboration
is important for us. Even when I dont use Ubuntu myself I think we should
collaborate as much as possible to manage our developer resources better.
I doesn't make sense to make the life of our developers more hard then it
already is.


More information about the pkg-java-maintainers mailing list