Phil Steitz wrote:
--- "Mark R. Diggory" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:commons-math-0.1-dev is sort of a weak and inadequate starting point, recommend we change it to "commons-math-1.0" and start incrementing. Once we establish our release date, I don't see how [dev|alpha|beta|rcX] designations are really going to help us this early on. Lets just cut it and then deal with real issues that arise afterward. If our users really want testing versions, we can start using them.
I think that we should release a 0.1 "soon." I will post a straw man
release plan / updated task list this evening. I think 0.1 is a good
starting point.
I just think 0.1 sounds like we havn't done anything yet, which couldn't farther from the truth.
4.) We should outline the appropriate contents and directory structuring for a release.The current configuration I've worked on produces the following:
*binary releases* (tar.gz and zip)
Archive: commons-math-0.1-dev.zip Length Date Time Name -------- ---- ---- ---- 0 01-29-04 09:31 commons-math-0.1-dev/ 11358 01-29-04 09:31 commons-math-0.1-dev/LICENSE.txt 0 01-29-04 09:31 commons-math-0.1-dev/docs/ 0 01-29-04 09:31 commons-math-0.1-dev/docs/clover/
> ...
6103 01-29-04 09:31 commons-math-0.1-dev/docs/apidocs/
...
124140 01-29-04 09:31
commons-math-0.1-dev/commons-math-0.1-dev.jar
110531 01-29-04 09:31
commons-math-0.1-dev/commons-beanutils-1.5.jar
165119 01-29-04 09:31
commons-math-0.1-dev/commons-collections-2.1.jar
72176 01-29-04 09:31
commons-math-0.1-dev/commons-discovery-20030211.213356.jar
31605 01-29-04 09:31
commons-math-0.1-dev/commons-logging-1.0.3.jar
169763 01-29-04 09:31 commons-math-0.1-dev/commons-lang-2.0.jar
I don't know if bundling the dependent jars is the best idea. What is the most prevalent practice among other commons components? In any case, it might be better to bundle them in a separate /lib directory.
I was approaching it as such:
1.) If you really want to use "math" and don't want to "chase dependencies", then the binary distribution (with dependency jars included) is the way to go. (they can go in a lib idr if its more to peoples liking).
2.) If you want to build it yourself the src distributions with their included build.xml scripts is the way to go. (The build script will download the dependencies from ibiblio for you).
3.) If you just want it as a component jar and deal with dependencies yourself, just grab the jar and go (either from ibiblio, or any apache mirror via the java-repository directory).
Three distributions, three different purposes. So if we want to have a binary archive with just the math jar and javadoc (maybe a build.xml script to download the jars) then we can add that to the list.
It would be good to cook up README.txt or INSTALL.txt instructions on each too.
-Mark -- Mark Diggory Software Developer Harvard MIT Data Center http://www.hmdc.harvard.edu
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
