Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
<snip/>
Now it seem not everybody agrees with or understand these concerns. Those who do will use -Dinclude.source-in-jars when building their unofficial distros, and will fetch 3rd party sources using the timestamp included in the library name (can even be automated using a script).
This is a good point: even if we cannot reach consensus on having the code inside the jars, it should be *completely automatic* to have the build process do so and for every library that you choose your application to depend on.
In this regard, I would *strongly* suggest *NOT* to put that information in the library name, but in the gump.xml descriptor, so that even gump can use that information in the future (for example, acting as a nightly build system instead of a continous integration one).
Well, do you deliver gump.xml with your project? No. If we don't include the source in jars, we must at least be able to reach them unambiguously just from that single jar file. Either through additional manifest files stored in it, or - and this is the most simple way - through the filename (provided of course that it's kept unchanged).
Furthermore, I'm not sure putting this information in gump.xml is necessary to perform nightly builds, as each project's build.xml should theroretically be able to do that build, either using dependencies included in the project itself or by fetching them from a remote repository. Reproduceability of the build is also a key aspect of software maintainance, and the OSS community has for long understood this because of its wide geographical distribution and its lazyness to answer FAQs ;-)
Sylvain
-- Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com { XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
