k ... this has been checked into the roller_3.0 branch now.
i shuffled around a number of things, so let me know if anything appears
to be broken.
one question that came up is what we actually want to name the final
release bundle. namely, should the release contain "apache-" in front
of it, which is how it works now, or is that not really necessary and it
should just start as "roller-"? doesn't really matter to me, just makes
the file paths a bit longer is all. this is what we have now ...
apache-roller-$version
apache-roller-src-$version
-- Allen
Allen Gilliland wrote:
I think everyone agreed on this so I'm going to move forward with
implementing it for the 3.0 release.
Does anyone care if I rename a few of the ant tasks along the way,
namely things like "build-beans" -> "build-business" and other cases
where I think the naming could be a bit more intuitive?
-- Allen
Anil Gangolli wrote:
That works. I think that means basically separating the source and
"binary" distributions.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Allen Gilliland"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 8:53 AM
Subject: Re: Proposal: New distribution layout
Good point. comments inline ...
Anil Gangolli wrote:
Allen, I already voted +1, but I just noticed sources being combined
in, and I had a couple of comments/questions.
(1) You might want to consider calling the top of the source tree
something other than "src", maybe "sources" because I think we
expect it to look like the top of the roller source tree does in SVN
which itself contains several directories and files (e.g. "web",
"tools", build.xml) as well as the actual "src" directory below it.
yes, that definitely makes sense.
(2) I hope there will be a source distribution that does not include
the binary(?)
what's the standard here? i don't usually download the source
distribution so i'm not sure what most people do, but it makes sense
to me that downloading the source means you don't get a binary.
(3) Do we plan to include the (distributable) libraries that are
under the "tools" in such combined packages?
seems like the best thing to do may be to remove the "webapp"
directory and include a "sources" directory in the source
distribution. in that case the "sources" directory would contain
everything needed to build the war, including libs.
would that work?
-- Allen
--a.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 5:09 AM
Subject: Re: Proposal: New distribution layout
+1
On 8/16/06, Elias Torres <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1
Allen Gilliland wrote:
> we talked about this a while back and I've just now got around to
> pulling this into an actual proposal ...
>
>
http://rollerweblogger.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=Proposal_DistributionLayout
>
> nothing fancy right now, basically just setting up the
distribution > so
> that the download isn't just the webapp.
>
> -- Allen
>
