If you are taking about the Maven wrapper. I did that for you guys. A PR I submitted a year or two ago does exactly this. It checks if the jar is there, if not it tries to download via wget and similar, if that falls it comes that little Java program (the one that started this whole discussion) executes this and downloads the jar that way.
I did that prior to starting Plc4x cause I knew jars in repos are big nonos. Chris Outlook fur Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> herunterladen ________________________________ From: Vinayakumar B <vinayakum...@apache.org> Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2019 8:38:39 AM To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Binary jars in the source release which are only for testing Hi, For testing purpose.. why cant provide bin artifacts in a separate convenience binary package as its being done in many other projects.. why it should be part of source package.? For the easy detection.. bin artifacts can have same version number as source. Again.. Official voting is on source package as per policy. -Vinay On Sun, 24 Feb 2019, 12:44 pm Willem Jiang, <willem.ji...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Ted, > > You made a good point, I think my solution could be building the jars > from source and then using it for testing. > > Willem Jiang > > Twitter: willemjiang > Weibo: 姜宁willem > > On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 10:02 AM Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Willem, > > > > This issue of embedded binaries for testing purposes has come up before. > > Examples include network intercepts for testing malware detection or > class > > files for a byte code manipulator. The network files can't easily be > > recreated since they were observed in the wild and the class files might > > have been produced by a specific (possibly broken) compiler version that > > isn't widely available. > > > > The key question is whether these binaries are derived from some source > > that could be compiled instead of distributing the binary objects. > Failing > > that, can the provenance and justification for the binary object be > > described? > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 6:49 PM Willem Jiang <willem.ji...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > Hi > > > > > > Thanks Justin for the clarification. I guess the policy imply the > > > source materials cannot have any binary. > > > But what if the binary is only for testing, which cannot be part of > > > the released software. > > > From my point of view, we don't need to modify the source materials > > > testing binary to do the software release as it is not a part of the > > > binary release of the software. > > > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Willem Jiang > > > > > > Twitter: willemjiang > > > Weibo: 姜宁willem > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 2:41 PM Justin Mclean < > jus...@classsoftware.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > [1]http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#what > > > > > > > > It’s explained in that link there i.e. "The Apache Software > Foundation > > > produces open source software. All releases are in the form of the > source > > > materials needed to make changes to the software being released”. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Justin > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
