--- "Mark R. Diggory" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Al Chou wrote: > > > --- "Mark R. Diggory" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [deletia] > > > > > >>*jar release* (jar) > >> > >> > >>>Archive: commons-math-0.1-dev.jar > > > > [deletia] > > > > > >>So the jar has no tests and no experimental code within it. > >> > >> > >>Any Comments? > >> > >>-Mark > > > > > > > > Sorry to chime in so late, but my preference would be to include the tests > no > > matter which release package it is. They serve as examples of using the > code, > > even if one decided to suspect them as a validation of the correctness of > the > > code (which is up to the individual user). I know that may seem to > hybridize > > all release packages, but if it were standard to include test source with > all > > our release packages, it maybe wouldn't seem like they were hybrids as much > as > > it would be just an additional form of documentation. > > > > > > Al > > Yes Al, we should plan to include the src/test java files into the > source and binary tar/zip distributions. But (IMHO) the > commons-math-1.0.jar itself is strictly just the api. I think this is > the standard way that commons projects are packaged. > > -Mark
I guess the jar file distribution is for when you need to grab a library you already know you depend on, without getting anything else -- say, when you're installing an already-written app that depends on a jar, and that jar didn't come with the app. That makes sense to me, I've certainly needed that sort of packaging enough times myself! Al __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
