Yuri,

That is probably correct, however we still need to take care of the source
distribution.  If these are Category B artifacts I think we are ok for the
source release as well.  I will research, and report back.

~Michael

On 12/4/12 4:33 AM, "Yuri Z" <[email protected]> wrote:

>We already have ant script that creates jar file that can be run, and IMO
>this jar does not include junit and emma. If release will include only
>this
>jar - I guess we are good as is.
>
>
>On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Benson Margulies
><[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 12:35 AM, Michael MacFadden
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Benson,
>> >
>> > I agree.  There was some progress in mavenizing the build.  I suspect
>> that
>> > that solution will take some time.  The build process is somewhat
>> > complicated at the moment, if this is the long term solution, we may
>>need
>> > to do something simpler to start off with.
>> >
>> > In the case of Junit, we should probably be able to remove it from a
>> > binary release.  There is no reason to include it in my mind since
>>it's
>> > only used during the build.  Not sure on emma.  Regardless a temporary
>> > work around would be to remove them and simply required the users to
>> > download them.  We could even provide a simple script to do that.
>>
>> Now you are thinking in the usual ASF terms. Use a build tool, or tell
>> users to download.
>>
>> Emma is a code coverage tool, so it should just be like junit:
>> certainly not in a runtime package, and, if not at least 'category b',
>> 'download it yourself' in the source release.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > ~Michael
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 12/3/12 3:45 PM, "Benson Margulies" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >>On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Michael MacFadden
>> >><[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>> Benson,
>> >>>
>> >>> Yes, Angus had been working this issue for us and found a few third
>> >>>party
>> >>> Jars.  Here is an extract from his email:
>> >>>
>> >>> ----------
>> >>> There's a couple of things going on at once at the moment:
>> >>> -i'm in contact with the libIDN author, who is happy to release the
>> >>> software under the Apache license, which means we can keep using
>>that
>> >>>once
>> >>> a new release comes out
>> >>> -the other two libraries junit and emma both think the best option
>>is
>> to
>> >>> obfuscate the code somehow like ant, if anyone has any experience in
>> >>>doing
>> >>> it speaking up would be greatly appreciated
>> >>> -----------
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Apparently, there is some precedent for obfuscating third party
>>jars.
>> >>>My
>> >>> assumption is that something about the license views distributing
>>Java
>> >>> jars as being akin to a source distribution do to the ease of
>> >>> decompilation.
>> >>
>> >>I cannot think of any reason why any Apache project should be
>> >>concerned with obfuscation or decompilation. We are open source, and
>> >>our dependencies are open source. Junit is a testing tool, so you
>> >>should never need to redistribute it, just arrange to have it
>> >>available for builds, and maven or ant/ivy will do that, and the same
>> >>with emma, which is another development tool.
>> >>
>> >>There are many examples of this at other project. If it would be
>> >>helpful, I could join the dev list to help with the discussion here.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> Angus,
>> >>>
>> >>> Can you she some light on this?
>> >>>
>> >>> ~Michael
>> >>>
>> >>> On 12/3/12 12:54 PM, "Benson Margulies" <[email protected]>
>>wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>>Dear Wave,
>> >>>>
>> >>>>I don't understand the remark in your report about the need to
>> >>>>'obfuscate' third party jar files. Could you please elaborate? Do
>>you
>> >>>>have problems with dependencies with incompatible licenses, or
>> >>>>something else?
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Thanks,
>> >>>>Benson
>> >>>>
>> 
>>>>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >>>>For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> 
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >>For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >
>>


Reply via email to