That's not a problem as long as the jars are under an acceptable license
for redistribution, which they are. A counterexample would be a tool we
like to use but won't redistribute - we should be sure things like that
don't get "sucked in" accidentally.
geir
Mark Hindess wrote:
On a related subject, one side-effect of the dependency changes is
that the downloaded jars that are copied to the deploy tree will be
picked up by the snapshot target. The ASF need to decide if
distributing these jars this way is acceptable.
-Mark.
On 4/4/06, Etienne Gagnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Geir,
Actually, I didn't reply to your question. See below.
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Ok. So are you against having the external dependency, or having an
external dependency for which we don't have a jar in svn or the website?
I'm against having an external dependency, in the HEAD trunk, for which
we don't have a SOURCE jar in svn or the website.
I assume that official releases do include "all" dependencies ("most" is
probably more appropriate; we probably won't include the OS and base C
libraries...).
Etienne
--
Etienne M. Gagnon, Ph.D. http://www.info2.uqam.ca/~egagnon/
SableVM: http://www.sablevm.org/
SableCC: http://www.sablecc.org/
--
Mark Hindess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
IBM Java Technology Centre, UK.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
