Hi Alan, What Srinath is trying to explain is about the released artifacts that are going to be listed in the release page. Like war, std-bin, min-bin, etc. For your requirement, we can host all the released jars in maven repo, which you can directly get from. For example, you will see axis2-adb-1.1.jar, axis2-kernel-1.1.jar, etc. In this way, you or your customers are not required to download the whole release. Does that sound good for you?
Thanks, Eran Chinthaka Alan M. Feldstein wrote: > Srinath Perera wrote: >> >> Our buid will always build a ADB jar as well. You can get it from >> there. But on the Axis2 relese I am proposing to put one Axis2 jar >> with all the code in . Becouse it will help 95% of the use cases!! >> >> If you are just using that class ..but not Axis2. I see no reason we >> should tie down Axis2 release jar by it. >> > For my development work, I can of course get ADB from your build. > > My customers, however, will be instructed to use a released Axis2 jar > (with a minimum version number of 1.1), not a nightly build. In fact, > I've tagged but withheld two product releases that depend on > UnsignedLong, whose bugs are blockers in Axis2 1.0. > > I agree that the vast majority of Axis2 use cases would enjoy the > convenience of a single jar, but consider the fact that the Java > language lacks unsigned types. The principle of reuse teaches use to go > find existing classes. Providing ADB separately encourages this reuse. > This way, you provide something useful to the broader Java community, > not just Web services. When you have created something that is generally > useful, I say that it should be kept separate. > > -- > > Alan Feldstein > > Cosmic Horizon logo > > http://www.alanfeldstein.com/ >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
