(dropped infra@)
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 10:54 PM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm exceedingly sorry here that the IPMC as a whole let you down by
> not turning into these issues and dealing with them at the outset.
Me too.
> Personally, I have no objection to including mutant jars in a -deps
> binary with a clear explanation of what they are, but I would like to
> see some support for that view, because I'd could imagine some
> objections based on recent email.
Me neither.
But let me expand on that :-)
Note the recent ("explosive"?) discussions were about source releases.
If you get those right, what ancillary stuff (binaries, -deps
packages, maven-repo-structured jar directories, ...) you can then
_also_ have is not so much under discussion I think.
Looking into ManifoldCF a bit, I think what you need is
* buildable source release that contains all the source for ManifoldCF
* source release that contains all the custom patches for the
dependencies that need patches
** you could include the source code, but I'd actually prefer not to do that
* source release that contains instructions for patching and then
installing needed dependencies
** ideally this is all scripted of course (`build.xml
install-and-patch-xerces` downloads xerces source release, extracts
and applies patch, builds jar, copies jar into place, ...), but I
don't see that as a requirement
And if you have all that, then yeah, having various binary
conveniences as well is not much of a discussion.
cheers,
Leo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
