[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > "Craig R. McClanahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 15/10/2002 02:20:01 > AM: > >> >> >> On Mon, 14 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >> > >> > Is there a rule somewhere about not having sandbox components as a >> > dependency? >> >> At a minimum, I think you can infer an indirect rule from the following >> conventions: >> >> * You can't release a Sandbox component at all -- it's just >> a wad-o-code. >> >> * You can't release a Commons component that depends on >> non-released other code. >> >> Struts has some interim dependencies on a sandbox component or two, but >> that will need to be resolved before a final Struts 1.1 release. > > Craig, > > out of curiosity, do you know where these conventions are laid out?
The first part was made very clear when the commons was created - I don't know where it is actually written, but I fought a lot against it and I remember quite well losing the vote. ( and IMO the majority was right :-) The second is pretty obvious since otherwise the component won't work well with a missing dependency. > Did I notice struts having 1.1 beta release(s) with sandbox dependencies? Struts is a standalone project that makes its own decisions. If no struts commiter voted against the release, then there's nothing we can do, they don't have to follow jakarta-commons rules. As a matter of fact, tomcat has major releases with sandbox dependencies. IMO a majority of commiters can release whatever it wants. If struts or tomcat or another project wants to release a sandbox component - they can do that, there's no rule against this. The rules applies only on releasing sandbox components without a vote ( out of jakarta-commons ) -- Costin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
