Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=223873
Summary: Review Request: ecj - Eclipse Compiler for the Java programming language Product: Fedora Core Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: overholt@redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,notting@redhat.com
Spec URL: http://overholt.ca/eclipse/ecj.spec SRPM URL: http://overholt.ca/eclipse/ecj-3.2.1-1.fc7.src.rpm Description: ECJ is the Java bytecode compiler of the Eclipse Platform. It is also known as the JDT Core batch compiler.
This package is somewhat a duplicate of the existing eclipse-ecj package (a sub-package of the eclipse SRPM). Due to developments in gcc, the gcc SRPM will soon need to BuildRequires: eclipse-ecj. This large dependency (and build loop) is undesirable so this separate ecj package was created. eclipse-ecj will cease to exist when this package is included.
This package cannot go into Extras due to the gcc requirement on it.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: ecj - Eclipse Compiler for the Java programming language
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=223873
overholt@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NOTABUG OtherBugsDependingO|188265 | nThis| |
------- Additional Comments From overholt@redhat.com 2007-01-23 14:32 EST ------- After thinking about this some more and discussing with Ben Konrath and Tom Fitzsimmons, I've decided to close this request. We couldn't come up with any actual benefits to having the separate ecj package. This SRPM can be used by those wanting quick turnaround on ecj changes, although these are not very likely.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org