I polled [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> a few years ago on a similar topic. Discussion at: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201312.mbox/%[email protected]%3E <http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201312.mbox/%[email protected]%3E>
Cheers, Greg Trasuk > On Jun 15, 2015, at 9:36 PM, Greg Trasuk <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> On Jun 15, 2015, at 7:02 PM, David Nalley <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Cédric Champeau >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> My understanding is that since those jars are for tests, it is OK to keep >>> them as long as we: >>> >>> - have a Rat rule that explicitly states why those jars are there >>> - have a JIRA ticket that we can point people at when they ask >>> >> >> I don't know that your understanding agrees with the Incubator's >> stance on binaries in releases. I'd at a minimum start a proactive >> discussion on general@., and I would expect a lot of resistance to >> binaries in a source release. >> >> —David > > Imagine if there were an incubator project that was an image-processing > library, and part of the test was to perform an averaging function on a test > image (e.g. of a 60%-gray image) and see if the result came to 60%. > > The test image would be a “binary” (e.g. a PNG), right? Would we insist that > the test be removed because having it would mean packaging a “binary” in the > source distribution? That would seem not to make much sense. > > We would certainly want to make sure that the image file in question was > licensed appropriately for distribution, but if you have a package whose > functionality is processing binary images, then it would make sense that > you’d need binary images in the test resources to prove out the package. > > Similarly, if part of Groovy’s job is to read jar files, then it certainly > makes sense that you might need jar files in the test resources. > > Obviously, if you were shipping a jar that was part of the final executable > environment, that would be unacceptable in a source distribution. But a > sample artifact used as a test input should be fine, so long as it’s obvious > that it’s a test resource, and there’s no issue with giving out copies of it. > > > Cheers, > > Greg Trasuk >
