Yeah, you could essentially unpack the source over the binary... for now, anyway... but some things would be slightly different. Like the addition of the proxy/thrift directory for the generated thrift bindings pulled out of proxy/target/. But... I really don't think it should be a goal to make the source directory structure and the binary directory structure overlap like this. The binary tarball should really just a "ready to use" thing, and the source should be a "ready to develop or re-package" thing.
-- Christopher L Tubbs II http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Billie Rinaldi <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 8:45 PM, Christopher <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I went through all the rpms and debs and tarballs to check to see if >> they were including the right things (ACCUMULO-1404). >> >> Personally, I don't think they should be in a binary-release... source >> code that needs to be compiled sounds like something you'd get out of >> the source tarball, so I assumed its inclusion was an oversight that I >> was correcting. (I did make sure the *.so files were included.) If >> there's a reason to keep source code in a binary package, then, I can >> add it back in, but really, if you can't use it out of the box, I'm >> not sure it should be in the binary tarball. >> > > This would be a change from what we were doing with "dist" releases, but I > am not necessarily against it. I find it nice to have the source there, as > I often look things up in it. To reproduce the previous structure, would I > be able to just unpack the source release over the binary release? > > Billie > > >> This is related to another issue I was looking at also, so i'll mention it >> here: >> What do we include for proxy thrift bindings? I see that currently >> we're dropping in the gen-rb, gen-java, and gen-py folders from the >> proxy thrift compilation. However, I'm not so sure we should be doing >> this... because: >> >> 1) we don't need to include java bindings for the proxy; compiled >> versions are already in the proxy jar, >> 2) not all packagers will even have installed thrift with the ability >> to produce ruby and python bindings, >> 3) these may or may not be helpful to any particular end user (though >> it's probably safe to assume ruby and python will be the most common), >> 4) we're not including the proxy.thrift file, which is perhaps the >> most important file for the proxy, and including it should be >> sufficient. >> >> >> >> -- >> Christopher L Tubbs II >> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii >> >> >> On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 11:22 PM, David Medinets >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I ran this command: >> > >> > git clone --branch 1.5 https://github.com/apache/accumulo.git >> > >> > then compiled to get a binary-release.tar.gz file. That gz file does not >> > seem to contain the C++ files to build the native libraries. Should they >> be >> > there? I don't recall hearing about removing them. >>
