Agree with Ant, we probably don't need jUnit into the binary distro. At the same time, do we really need ASM?
On the other hand, roughly I see 2 kinds of audience: 2-1. developers who participate in development. I guess they might lean to work upon the source repository instead of the release 2-2. users who don't participate in development yet. I guess they concern binary distro much more than the source counterpart If users are the majority of the *release* audience, it'll be nice to make sample build easy against binary distro. Currectly, I have to do some work to build sample. I see some errors running the samples: 1. NullPointerException @ CreateDataObjectFromXmlString.java:153 2. ClassCastException @ ObtainingDataGraphFromXml.java:156 3. NullPointerException @ PurchaseOrderControl.java:438 (option 13) On 3/15/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/15/07, kelvin goodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have posted an SDO Java M3 release candidate here: > http://people.apache.org/~kelvingoodson/sdo_java/M3/RC1/< > http://people.apache.org/%7Erobbinspg/M3-RC1/> > > Please take a look at this and try it out, so that I can pick up any > errors > quickly and move towards a vote on a proper release in the short term. > > Thanks, Kelvin. > Looks pretty good to me. The binary distro includes JUnit, do you really need that? If so you need to add it to the LICENSE and NOTICE files. Also should probably include the ASM copyright in the NOTICE file. ...ant
-- Yang ZHONG
