Hi Craig, I'm not really familiar with that option. Can you elaborate or perhaps share a url?
What trade-offs do we face in this decision? Charles. On Jan 24, 2008 8:19 PM, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Charles, > > Does it make sense to ship the binary release as a maven artifact? > > This would be useful (mostly) if users wrote code and wanted to > automatically include it in their programs. It would be suitable if > the primary release artifact is "just a jar with a bunch of java > classes and legal notices (meta-inf) in it". > > Craig > > > On Jan 23, 2008, at 11:15 PM, Charles Matthew Chen wrote: > > > Hi Craig, > > > > It seems like our needs are fairly ordinary. Like most projects, I > > think we would do well to produce "source" and "binary" releases. > > > > The binary release would include a .jar file with the core classes > > (no unit tests or test data), the javadocs and basic files such as the > > license, changelist, a snapshot of the wiki docs (or at least a > > reference to them), etc. The .jar file wouldn't neccessarily have to > > be signed, or packaged in a particular way. > > > > The source release would include all of the sources files (core and > > test), the test data, the javadocs, and the basic files. It would > > include nearly everything in the repo. I'm not sure what it wouldn't > > include. > > > > The binary and source releases would be available as both .zip and > > .tar.gz archives. > > > > Charles. > > > > > > > > On Jan 23, 2008 1:04 AM, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > >> Hi Charles, > >> > >> > >> On Jan 22, 2008, at 9:12 PM, Charles Matthew Chen wrote: > >> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> I've released a new non-Apache build (0.88) of Sanselan. It's > >>> available here: > >>> > >>> http://fightingquaker.com/sanselan/ > >> ... > >>> > >>> On the last point, I wonder what we can do to reach the point of > >>> our first apache build. I saw the following message on the > >>> incubator's general mailing list a few weeks ago. Would it be a > >>> good > >>> idea to enlist Robert's help? > >> > >> What Robert is discussing here is where to post the release > >> artifacts. > >> > >> Before we get there, we need to make sure we're ready to release > >> something. > >> > >> Let's start with this: What do we release? How do we package it? > >> > >> Craig > >>> > >>> > >>> Charles. > >>> > >>> > >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > >>> From: "Robert Burrell Donkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 22:51:23 +0000 > >>> Subject: Re: Uploading Releases to apache.org/dist/incubator > >>> On Jan 2, 2008 10:26 PM, Frank Barnaby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hi folks, > >>> > >>> hi frank > >>> > >>>> I've found some information regarding the need to distribute > >>>> incubating > >>>> releases through www.apache.org/dist/incubator/podling-name > >>>> (ie, people.apache.org:/www/www.apache.org/dist/incubator/podling-name) > >>>> and have read a readme in the dist/incubator directory, which > >>>> states > >>>> that > >>>> I should consult this mailing list before populating the dist area. > >>> > >>> yep - i created that document > >>> > >>> policy is now that official releases issued by the incubator need to > >>> be distributed through the standard apache distribution mechanism > >>> > >>> the documentation is still being worked on ATM so i've volunteered > >>> to > >>> walk anyone who wants to release though the process > >>> > >>> if i'm right in assuming that this is river-related, let's hop back > >>> onto river-dev (i'm subscribing now). if not, please jump in > >>> > >>> - robert > >> > >> Craig Russell > >> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/ > >> jdo > >> 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! > >> > >> > > Craig Russell > Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo > 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! > >
