On 9/15/05, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I **really** don't think we should have derby jars in svn > > Why not? > > AFAIK derby would be default configured with derby as DB - so > > it should work out-of-the-box. Since it's embedded(not > > installed like mysql), the jars should be there. > > Probably Danny just want to remove the jars from the sources repository but > still bundle them in the default binary distribution. > We could even do the same thing with the whole phoenix thing if we were > using an official release of phoenix. > > In fact only build dependencies (jars needed to build the sources) should be > in the repository.
Wouldn't we need to switch to maven to get away with something like this? -- Serge Knystautas Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com p. 301.656.5501 e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
