I think that we should make the binaries available as is. It gives
folks something to work even with the extra config. Aside from the
image size (and confusion if people are looking at the system modules)
they don't seem to be doing any harm.
I agree that we should spend much more time on M4 ... but if we just
release them as-is then it shouldn't consume many more cycles.
Joe
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
On Apr 3, 2007, at 4:57 PM, Donald Woods wrote:
I'll upload the 11 Axis2 and 11 CXF artifacts into the M4 branches
local repo and update the pom.xml if someone will either
respin/republish the build for me or walk me through how to do it....:-)
Donald, excellent and I appreciate it.
I would checkout the 2.0-M4 in branches to start with. There must be
some lingering issue in hte build or we somehow picked up the SNAPSHOT
though some transitive dependencies.
If you like I can provide you with the repo I used for this build. It
may be possible to address Alan's concern about being able to rebuild as
well.
Although, personally I think the time invested in 2.0 is better spent
than waving a dead chicken on 2.0-M4. By the time it get built and
voted on we'll be into next week most likely with the next milestone a
few weeks away.
I think a better solution would be to simply create an unstable set and
put them up on people.apache.org.
Other's thoughts?
-Donald
