I get "Not found" message, probably you have removed the folder...
As I know you cannot distrubute some binaries because of licencing
reasons (it is possible that in the meantime the problematic binaries
have been removed/replaced).
I always hate when I download something, and the distribution contains
only a plain text list of dependencies (10+) which I had to find and
download manually from "somewhere".
What is important in a release:
- the most important is to upload the binaries and the pom to ibiblio
- create a distribution which includes all dependencies (if you don't
care about licensing restrictions)
- otherwise do not just provide a plain text file for the non-included
dependecies but direct links to the ibiblio location of them, so the
user needs only click on a link to get that dependecy
Regards:
Norbi
Jesse Kuhnert írta:
I took another look at our current releases and noticed that we aren't
exactly providing a lot in our distributions other than the tapestry jar
files themselves.
While looking around the other various apache (or any OS project for that
matter) project release bundles I noticed that they do helpfully include
their dependencies / other things for their users. Specifically, we
can
look at either tomcat or struts - the recent struts release seems like a
good candidate to validate my argument though:
http://struts.apache.org/download.cgi#struts208
If you look through the "full" release you'll find:
apps/ - various war files
lib/ - All struts jars as well as all the other libraries it depends on.
Like OGNL / antlr / various apache commons things / etc..
src/ - self descriptive
docs/ - Generated site documentation
I've just finished refactoring the 4.1.2 maven2 assembly descriptors to
produce basically the same exact thing. All license files / notices /
etc
are in the right places but the release would also be completely self
contained. No need to download anything from anywhere else once you get
it. I'd like to get some feedback on this move before I actually
deploy it
to some kind of http://people.apache.org/~jkuhnert/release/ directory for
voting in case anyone sees any issues.
I know we've heard variations on this P.O.V. in apache legal but am
starting
to wonder if the reality of what we see in all other apache project
releases
(meaning they include non apache jar dependencies as well, just hopefully
not gpl/lgpl / incompatible license dependencies) sort of dwarfs whatever
confusion may be coming from other sources.
Ie. Why are we making users suffer when we don't have to?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.9.6/863 - Release Date: 2007.06.23. 11:08
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
