How other package pgjdbc

From: Pavel Raiskup <praiskup(at)redhat(dot)com>
To: Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>
Cc: Vitalii Tymchyshyn <vit(at)tym(dot)im>, Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov(dot)vladimir(at)gmail(dot)com>, List <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Álvaro Hernández <aht(at)8kdata(dot)com>
Subject: How other package pgjdbc
Date: 2016-01-25 15:33:19
Message-ID: 4891530.ozDQ5MGqEi@nb.usersys.redhat.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

On Monday 25 of January 2016 15:33:18 Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> On Monday 25 of January 2016 08:46:56 Dave Cramer wrote:
> > Well like it or not, spring is arguably the largest enterprise java
> > dependency and it has hundreds if not thousands of dependencies which
> > enterprise users happily download.
>
> I can concur with you, Dave. There are people who are OK with that.
>
> > So I'm not sure how your argument holds water.
>
> Sure. You may choose to force users to use maven everywhere, via not
> allowing us to build from source. But I'm here please you not to do that.
>
> > I would imagine from a redhat perspective redhat is the only trusted
> > source. However this is 2016 and the sheer volume of dependencies
> > modern software requires makes this presumption untenable.
>
> Substitute Red Hat with any Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris etc. distributions.
> All of those are used and trusted. At least nowadays -- making this
> totally off-topic is not worth; I'm just trying to build from source.
>
> Believe it or not -- there are people who do not trust maven repositories
> -- and I'm not sure whether PostgreSQL project should encourage people to
> use maven repositories everywhere. PostgreSQL should be re-distribuable
> everywhere, if possible.
>
> > This argument is not constructive but an attempt to show another point
> > of view.
>
> Ack.
>
> > I have asked to join the osgi-dev list and will ask them how to deal
> > with this issue
>
> Right, but our mission is to distribute pgjdbc, not OSGi (which is
> something osgi-dev will tell you probably). If we could opt-out it, it
> would be fine.

Just a quick observation while trying to convince you that GNU/Linux
distributions do care about pgjdbc package-ability:

Gentoo build scripts:
https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/tree/dev-java/jdbc-postgresql/jdbc-postgresql-9.4_p1206.ebuild
Which is something I'm trying to avoid, but yes -- they were able to
rebase to 1206 thanks to those hacks.

Arch linux has pgjdbc in AUR repository. It means that there is no
support -- the reason is because they do not build from source; they
download the binary from upstream repository.
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/postgresql-jdbc/

Debian has already been discussed. Way too old packages.

OpenSUSE (9.4.1201):
https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/openSUSE:Leap:42.1/postgresql-jdbc/postgresql-jdbc.spec?expand=1

Pavel

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vitalii Tymchyshyn 2016-01-25 19:27:50 Re: Merge pgjdbc-parent-poms project into pgjdbc please
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2016-01-25 14:40:19 Re: Merge pgjdbc-parent-poms project into pgjdbc please