Within Red Hat it's a requirement that anything shipped with our products,
including thirdparty jars, is rebuilt from source. So that's part of my
reasoning behind wanting this. I realize that is not a requirement at most
organizations, but it still seems better to have it available.
The ideal solution IMO would be if the same jar/zip could be used for IDE
integration and would contain the full sources for rebuilding, but I don't think
that's possible.
We don't have to require that the full source zips are uploaded. Just making it
recommended and easy to do is enough IMO.
Brent Atkinson wrote:
For what it's worth, I agree with Dan.
I see the argument with change affecting SCM systems, but when you change systems you're making a specific choice to break something where history matters. If you're porting history, the identifier may change, but you should still have the released code. If you're managing things appropriately, you also have the binary dependencies.
Bundling what amounts to a source rpm (zip in this case) for each release feels like a lazy, brute-force source management method. I suppose if you have the resources to throw at it, it can save you some headaches. Requiring it seems a bit strong, especially if the safety net serves as a rationalization for quickly migrating to the SCM du jour. That decision should still carry a considerable burden with it.
Maybe I'm missing the point?
Brent
Dan Tran <[email protected]> 6/9/2009 6:43 PM >>>
Is this really necessary? For me as long as I have the source [1],
that is all i want.
http://repo2.maven.org/maven2/org/codehaus/mojo/build-helper-maven-plugin/1.3/
-D
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
