On 2/26/2013 8:52 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
> On 26.02.2013 14:33, Marshall Schor wrote:
>> On 2/26/2013 6:16 AM, Jörn Kottmann wrote:
>>> On 02/26/2013 10:29 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
>>>> I think I have to reread the howtos. I thought the License/Notice files
>>>> only
>>>> have to cover the stuff in the binaries. If antlr needs to be covered, what
>>>> about the htmlparser?
>>> That is correct, you must only mention artifacts which are redistributed.
>>> If the anltr or htmlparser jar is not included in the binary distribution
>>> you
>>> should not mention them.
>> +1.
>>
>> The reason I thought you needed to include the Antlr things was because in
>> the
>> JAR's META-INF/DEPENDENCIES file, antlr things (and, yes, HTML Parser things,
>> too) are listed.
>>
>> I believe this is because the POM specifies these as dependencies. But I see
>> they are not included (embedded) in the JAR. But I guess the JAR has calls
>> out
>> to ANTLR and HTML Parser APIs.
>>
>> Is this JAR (which is the only non-Eclipse plugin JAR in the binary zip/tar,
>> I
>> think), intended to be used in a non-Eclipse setup?
>>
>> Since I found this JAR in the "convenience" binary assembly, I presume there
>> is
>> some intent that people who download this and unzip it want to be able to run
>> something. The normal convention for "convenience" binaries is to include
>> dependent JARs in a lib/ directory, or provide some install information that
>> tells the user what they need to do to complete an install of the binary.
>> But I
>> don't see Jars for these included in the convenience binary assembly.
>>
>> So, I'm probably just confused as to the purpose of the binary assembly -
>> what
>> the expectation is that a user would do with this... I thought it was for
>> non-Eclipse, non- workbench uses. I took a quick look in the textmarker
>> book to
>> see if this packaging was described and had install / use instructions but
>> didn't see this (but maybe I missed it).
>>
>> So - bottom line - the Antlr and HTML parser license/notice do not have to be
>> included in this JAR (because these artifacts are not included with the JAR).
>> Since the JAR has dependencies on these, if it is intended to be used in a
>> non-Eclipse environment, then a convenience binary should include these JARs
>> or
>> tell the user how to get them, I think.
>
> Yes. I did not include the jars of the dependencies (antlr) in the binary
> distribution because then I probably should also include the complete uimaj
> release since textmarker won't do anything without the uimaj implementation.
> Actually, the engine plugins contains all dependencies but the uimaj plugins.
>
> Should I create an additional ("binary") README file, which mentions where to
> find the jars of the additional dependencies?
>
> I personally would wait until someone conplains about it.
What is the purpose of the binary convenience assembly? If not obvious, is some
section in the textmarker book needed to explain how to set this up and make use
of it?
-Marshall
>
> Peter
>
>
>> -Marshall
>>
>>
>>> Jörn
>>>
>
>
