Hi,
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Roy T. Fielding field...@gbiv.com wrote:
Yes, it's called a -deps package, and individuals occasionally produce
them and even redistribute them from our servers (as binaries).
So, to move this discussion forward, do you think it would be
acceptable if
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 10:34 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Roy T. Fielding field...@gbiv.com
wrote:
Yes, it's called a -deps package, and individuals occasionally produce
them and even redistribute them from our servers (as
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 10:34 AM, Jukka Zitting
jukka.zitt...@gmail.comwrote:
So, to move this discussion forward, do you think it would be
acceptable if ManifoldCF (and any other project with binary
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Leo Simons m...@leosimons.com wrote:
Shipping a set of CDDL jars out of some java.net projects that oracle
has all but abandoned is far beyond my imagined threshold of
reasonable on the scale. Do you actually see that differently?
Agreed. These are exactly
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
...It seems like Roy is much more categorical about this. Assuming I
understand his point correctly, *no* binary dependencies are
acceptable within a source tarball.
What I don't quite (yet) understand is how a
I mentioned this in another note but I'll repeat here to use your example.
Where the binaries do live in a Maven repo and are versioned there is less of
an issue and it becomes a convenience. A real challenge is what to do if your
taking a stable copy of a project that doesn't have a
Jukka Zitting wrote on Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 14:41:02 +0200:
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Leo Simons m...@leosimons.com wrote:
Shipping a set of CDDL jars out of some java.net projects that oracle
has all but abandoned is far beyond my imagined threshold of
reasonable on the
On Mar 29, 2012, at 15:07 , Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
wrote:
...It seems like Roy is much more categorical about this. Assuming I
understand his point correctly, *no* binary dependencies are
acceptable within a source
Le 3/29/12 3:41 PM, Daniel Shahaf a écrit :
Jukka Zitting wrote on Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 14:41:02 +0200:
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Leo Simonsm...@leosimons.com wrote:
Shipping a set of CDDL jars out of some java.net projects that oracle
has all but abandoned is far beyond my
On 29 March 2012 15:09, Marcel Offermans marcel.offerm...@luminis.nl wrote:
On Mar 29, 2012, at 15:07 , Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
wrote:
...It seems like Roy is much more categorical about this. Assuming I
understand his
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 1:16 AM, Leo Simons m...@leosimons.com wrote:
That said, I'm not aware of us actually having such a release out there?
Take such fringe projects like Ant, Tomcat, Lucene and Xalan that have
been shipping releases like throughout the past decade. See examples
dating
Roy,
Of course you, personally, can't be expected to supervise all projects
or fix all documentation. At the same time, there's something a little
depressing about the situation. On the one hand, the principle at work
here is, to paraphrase you, absolutely central to the defined mission
of the
On Mar 28, 2012, at 2:39 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
Roy,
Of course you, personally, can't be expected to supervise all projects
or fix all documentation. At the same time, there's something a little
depressing about the situation. On the one hand, the principle at work
here is, to
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Roy T. Fielding field...@gbiv.com wrote:
Me not happy. This is not any individual's fault, least of all Jukka,
and certainly not a fault of the ManifoldCF podling that is going through
this fun precisely to learn how to create an Apache release. It is an
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Roy T. Fielding field...@gbiv.com wrote:
On Mar 27, 2012, at 12:57 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
Hi,
[dropped infra@, I believe most interested people are already on
general@]
Let's decouple this thread from the specific issue of the ManifoldCF
release.
(Was: [VOTE] Release
ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC0)
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Roy T. Fielding field...@gbiv.com wrote:
On Mar 27, 2012, at 12:57 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
Hi,
[dropped infra@, I believe most interested people are already on
general@]
Let's decouple this thread from
On Mar 28, 2012, at 9:35 AM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
If you want to do it right, build the whole thing from scratch -- nothing
but the source code. If there isn't at least one person (or CI bot)
doing that per project, we're screwed.
I think the problem has gotten more challenging over time
Hi,
[dropped infra@, I believe most interested people are already on general@]
Let's decouple this thread from the specific issue of the ManifoldCF
release. There's a long tradition of Apache releases like the ones
ManifoldCF is producing, so turning this suddenly into a blocker is
IMHO bad
On Mar 27, 2012, at 12:57 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
Hi,
[dropped infra@, I believe most interested people are already on general@]
Let's decouple this thread from the specific issue of the ManifoldCF
release. There's a long tradition of Apache releases like the ones
ManifoldCF is
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Let's decouple this thread from the specific issue of the ManifoldCF
release. There's a long tradition of Apache releases like the ones
ManifoldCF is producing, so turning this suddenly into a blocker is
IMHO bad
20 matches
Mail list logo
