Agree. Almost all the developers I've known use Maven or Gradle to manage dependencies.
吴晟 Sheng Wu <wu.sh...@foxmail.com> 于2019年4月2日周二 下午1:10写道： > I think we need other PPMC members feedback. > > > I am OK w/ or w/o dependency libs in sharding-jdbc binary. > > > ------------------ > Sheng Wu > Apache SkyWalking, ShardingSphere, Zipkin > Twitter, wusheng1108 > > > > > > > > ------------------ Original ------------------ > From: "apache.clr"<apache....@gmail.com>; > Date: Tue, Apr 2, 2019 02:20 AM > To: "dev"<dev@shardingsphere.apache.org>; > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] ShardingSphere 4.0.0-RC1 release [ROUND 2] > > > > Hi, > > > On Mar 31, 2019, at 11:00 AM, 吴晟 Sheng Wu <wu.sh...@foxmail.com> wrote: > > > >> How do you if we think remove file [2], and release a new zip for > > Sharding-JDBC jars only? > > > > I support this change. > > > > > > Just one question for mentors, do we need include all dependency jars > for sharding-jdbc in bin, which most users would choose maven dependency, > but no dependency jars makes the hard to use through traditional lib > dependency(like no maven/gradle). > > > > > > What do mentors suggest and ppmc think? > > The contents of a convenience binary are decided by the project. If you > expect that users will already have java and maven installed, it would make > sense to me to release a binary that was in the form of a maven project, > with dependencies listed in the pom.xml and the jar files in the target > directory. The user could then go to the project, enter "mvn xxx" and maven > would download the dependencies and run the xxx task. > > But you could as well have a different packaging that contained the > sharding-jdbc jar file and a script that installed it into the user's local > mvn repository. You could even have a tools directory that contained the > dependent jars and installed them into the user's local repository. Or have > a lib directory that was referenced directly from the mvn pom without being > installed into the local repository. > > I don't have much experience with projects that rely on other packaging > tools. > > Anyway, as long as all of the non-Apache projects actually distributed > with the binary release are documented in the appropriate LICENSE and > NOTICE files, the project can choose what is best for their users. > > Craig > > > > > > > > Sheng Wu > > Apache SkyWalking, ShardingSphere, Zipkin > > > > From Wu Sheng 's phone. > > > > > > ------------------ Original ------------------ > > From: zhangli...@apache.org <zhangli...@apache.org> > > Date: Sun,Mar 31,2019 7:51 AM > > To: dev <dev@shardingsphere.apache.org> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] ShardingSphere 4.0.0-RC1 release [ROUND 2] > > > > > > > > I found another problem. > > > > Right now, we have released 3 files. src[1], bin[2] and > sharding-proxy-bin > > [3]. > > As you know, ShardingSphere is composited by Sharding-JDBC and > > Sharding-Proxy. > > Sharding-Proxy is a executable jar, so we released it as [3]. But > > sharding-jdbc is java lib, do not have executable jar, so we don't > release > > it independently. > > > > Src[1] is all source codes, bin[2] include all jars of Sharding-JDBC and > > Sharding-Proxy, it maybe cause end users confused. > > > > How do you if we think remove file [2], and release a new zip for > > Sharding-JDBC jars only? > > > > [1] > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/shardingsphere/4.0.0-RC1/apache-shardingsphere-incubating-4.0.0-RC1-src.zip > > [2] > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/shardingsphere/4.0.0-RC1/apache-shardingsphere-incubating-4.0.0-RC1-bin.zip > > [3] > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/shardingsphere/4.0.0-RC1/apache-shardingsphere-incubating-4.0.0-RC1-sharding-proxy.tar.gz > > ------------------ > > > > Liang Zhang (John) > > Apache ShardingSphere & Dubbo > > > > > > zhangli...@apache.org <zhangli...@apache.org> 于2019年3月31日周日 下午10:38写道： > > > >> Hi Craig, > >> > >>> If I understand correctly, the src and bin releases contain no third > >> party code. Only the sharding-proxy release contains third party code. > >> > >> Yes, it is. > >> > >>> The license directory for sharding-proxy is non-standard. Usually the > >> LICENSE should contain the text of all licenses used in the release. Has > >> this been discussed already? > >> > >> We have already put non-standard licenses into `licenses` folder, and > add > >> description in LICENSE file to explain them, do we have any other > problems? > >> > >> I note that not all Mentors have voted. Can we contact them and ask them > >> to check this release before we send this to the IPMC? > >> > >>> Yes, we can. > > Craig L Russell > c...@apache.org -- Zhang Yonglun Apache ShardingSphere
