On Nov 19, 2007 1:41 AM, Chris Mattmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Jukka, > > I'm in complete agreement with you on this. I'd like to push this release > out sooner rather than later. I think that the system in its current state > is highly useful (I'm already targeting its use in 2 projects at my job). > > I'm happy releasing Tika as a jar file (+1) and a related POM. Let's target > the webapp/Swing GUI/CLI as a 0.2 feature.
Is a "binary only" release acceptable at the ASF? I always thought as an "open source" organization the minimum requirement for a release was a source distro from which someone could build it themselves - and a binary distro was a nice to have convience as an optional extra. Also the changes for TIKA-101 added in the facility to create source and binary distros (run "mvn site assembly:assembly") which hopefully meet the criteria acceptable to the ASF for a release - so it should be straight forward to do so. The real issue though is whether the IPMC will accept just a jar as a release - since as an incubating project Tika can't actually release anything without their approval. I would be surprised if they didn't make the same comment as I did. Niall > I can work on the release as soon as I get a go-ahead from the rest of you > guys. Should we call a vote? I think that the only blocker issue is TIKA-91 > that needs to be fixed pre-release. The rest of the issues (8 major and 12 > minor) are all such that they can be cast for the 0.2 release. > > Cheers, > Chris > > > > On 11/11/07 3:56 PM, "Jukka Zitting" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I don't think we'll have the 0.1 release out for ApacheCon (it's > > probably even procedurally too late already), but it would still be > > nice to target for a release in a relatively near future. I think > > we're already at a point where quite a few people would find a frozen > > snapshot of Tika useful (even if the API still isn't stable). > > > > There are a number of API and implementation improvements I have in > > mind (I'll try to offload them to Jira), but generally I'm reasonably > > happy with the current state. The main thing I'm worried about is > > packaging (and documentation, but that's not so important yet). > > > > Are we happy with releasing Tika just as a jar file with a related POM > > to be published in the Maven repository, or should we come up with > > some packaging that perhaps bundles also all the dependencies? I'd be > > fine with just a jar artifact unless we want to make Tika runnable > > just by itself (either as a webapp or a CLI application). > > > > BR, > > > > Jukka Zitting > > ______________________________________________ > Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cognizant Development Engineer > Early Detection Research Network Project > _________________________________________________ > Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA > Office: 171-266B Mailstop: 171-246 > _______________________________________________________ > > Disclaimer: The opinions presented within are my own and do not reflect > those of either NASA, JPL, or the California Institute of Technology. > > >
