Won't a lot of people already have their version of JRuby and not want a special one? I'm fine with having a patched version on github and referring it in our release notes. I'm not wild about including a version of JRuby with Pig, for both licensing reasons and because our tar file is bloated enough as it is.
Alan. On Mar 23, 2012, at 11:38 AM, Daniel Dai wrote: > Hi, Jonathan, > What bug is it? Last time when I try, it seems work well for me. We > can leave a small hole and describe the limitation clearly in release > notes/code comments/javadocs, we can also provide a link to the ticket > tracking the issue. I remember we did something similar for javacc > before. However, I don't think we shall include a JRuby patch in Pig. > > Daniel > > On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Jonathan Coveney <[email protected]> wrote: >> First off: JRuby patch is almost done. It's passing tests, I have some more >> to add, but I think the definitive version to work off will be out today >> (assuming we can reconcile what follows :) >> >> I hit a bug in JRuby that is pretty impossible to avoid (it's a bug in the >> way files were found on the classpath). I figured out the bug and let the >> JRuby devs know and they patched master, but that means that our version is >> still buggy. I put a patched version of the file in the Pig project pending >> a new JRuby release, and this works, but there are two issues: >> 1) Is this how we want this to be structued? It's weird to have this random >> file in there, but on the other hand, it's a clean and clear fix. >> 2) Is this legal? JRuby has a kind of odd triple license and I think you >> can choose 1 for pieces that aren't explicitly GPL (of which there are very >> few). One of those licenses is the CPL, which Apache says is kosher as long >> as you're explicit, but I don't know. Is this fine? Should I talk to JRuby >> or Apache legal? >> >> I suppose the alternative would be to publish a patched version of JRuby >> (we could fork it on Github) and depend on that. >> >> I appreciate your comments >> Jon
