> -----Original Message----- > From: Niall Pemberton [mailto:niall.pember...@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 11:11 AM > To: Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Codec 1.4 based on RC2 > > On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Mat Booth<fed...@matbooth.co.uk> wrote: > > > > I for one would appreciate OSGI information in the Ant generated jar, > > Why?
Partly because of a need to build commons-codec from source (distribution packaging rules [1]) and I'd rather not deviate from the upstream distribution by adding my own manifest file to the resulting jar and partly because (rather selfishly) ant is the build system I know and can debug because I use it for work. It's no biggie if you can't do this for the release, I just thought it would be better if the resultant jars were identical then users wouldn't have to know about the quirks of using each build system. Plus, why *wouldn't* you want the OSGI information in the Ant generated jar? ;-) [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#No_inclusion_of_pre-built_binaries_or_libraries -- Mat Booth A: Because it destroys the order of the conversation. Q: Why shouldn't you do it? A: Posting your reply above the original message. Q: What is top-posting? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
