So you are saying +1 for the assembly release ...but I don't get the
"who needs what" part.
What I meant was that I did not see it as a big user inconvenience to
bundle all of the jars into a single release, since they are
individually small. So, yes, I am +1 on putting together an assembly
and making it available, along with the KEYS file, on the commons
download page.
I just fear no one will use it ...but anyway.
See above ...I think subversion is our source distribution. I don't
really see a point in providing a classic source distribution. But
maybe that's too much change for now ;)
Yes, too much for me at least. In theory, voting on a tag and
pointing users there to get sources still could be viewed as a
release, but that is a big change from current practice and
inconvenient for users who prefer to build from release sources.
It is a big change ...but who says that changes are bad? ;)
But seriously: be realistic. Those people building the releases from
will have subversion on their machine. And what can be simpler than a
one-liner to checkout the sources? Even downloading it from an apache
mirror is more work.
I think we should always distribute the source with our releases.
I think the only problem that I am seeing is that tags are not
immutable in svn. So in theory even a tag is not good enough but a
release is really a revision number.
I guess what we are really talking about here is "what is a release?"
True. Especially with maven2 as the build system. I tried to raise
that a couple of times already. We need to come up with proper
release instructions for maven2 based projects. This is for sure.
<snip/>
I'll prepare the assembly distributions and hope to get your +1
then :)
Of course! I just need to be able to build it first :)
http://people.apache.org/builds/jakarta-commons/jci/1.0-RC4/dists/
Go nuts :)
cheers
--
Torsten
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
