-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Agreed. Not that I have a vote, but that convention has made many of
the Jakarta Commons libs much easier to track in my projects.
Yonik Seeley wrote:
> Definitely. That's exactly our usecase... copying all the jars we
> need (or perhaps all of them
Definitely. That's exactly our usecase... copying all the jars we
need (or perhaps all of them) into the lib directory of our webapp.
-Yonik
On 5/5/05, Doug Cutting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think that all of the jars we create should be prefixed with 'lucene-'
> and end with the version.
On May 5, 2005, at 3:52 PM, Doug Cutting wrote:
I'd be happy to change it if that is the desire though.
I think that all of the jars we create should be prefixed with
'lucene-' and end with the version. That will make it easier for
folks to copy them into lib directories and still know what th
Erik Hatcher wrote:
My rationale for keeping all the contrib components in their own
subdirectories was to allow room for eventual documentation or other
files that might want to come along for the ride (like maybe a
dependent ASL'd JAR?).
That makes sense.
I'd be happy to change it if that i
On May 2, 2005, at 2:52 PM, Doug Cutting wrote:
Thanks for doing all this! It looks great!
*whew* - thanks. As always, let me know if there is anything further
I can do. I'll tidy things up as I go with it.
What are your thoughts on what files we should actually
distribute? There is merit
Thanks for doing all this! It looks great!
Erik Hatcher wrote:
However it seems much simpler for us to only distribute
lucene-XX.tar.gz/zip and lucene-XX-src.tar.gz/.zip rather than
distributing each contrib component separately.
I agree.
The current build
process builds the same 4 distributio
