On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 03:27, Matt Juntunen <matt.a.juntu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > I apologize if this was resolved already and I missed it, but did we > land anywhere on the issue of whether or not to release binaries of > example code modules? I've included the example module binaries in > previous releases of numbers and geometry but I don't think that they > are actually useful just as binaries. Are we ok to just leave the > example modules as code included in the source release? Also, should > they be part of the deployed site or should that just be for the > public API portions?
I think that depends on the nature of the examples. NET has several examples which are bundled with the binary release. (They are in a separate jar) The examples vary in functionality, but most are capable of at least rudimentary operation. I think it is important to keep examples out of the main release jars, but it can be useful to include examples as source and binary jars in the binary release bundle (as well as the Javadoc API) so developers have all they need to use the API. [I'm not quite sure why NET includes the main source jar rather than an examples source jar - perhaps that is a mistake.] If the examples are only really useful in the context of the website, then they should probably not be included in releases. > Regards, > Matt J > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
