You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by Tim O'Brien <to...@discursive.com> on 2004/06/04 23:18:38 UTC
[all] Instead of source and binary - one distribution
We make releases both source and binary, but why not just start cutting one
release? I can understand why a product like HTTPD would be distributed
without source, but the commons community consists of developers.
Can anyone think of any good reason to preserve the current release
structure.
My apologizes in advance if this starts an endless flame war. I have a
knack for that.
-----
Tim O'Brien
tobrien@discursive.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [all] Instead of source and binary - one distribution
Posted by Mikhail Krivoshein <in...@mikkri.com>.
-0
I'm usually using stable downloaded jars. I guess most commons users are
not subscribed to this list
and just happy with downloaded stable builds.
Best regards,
Mikhail Krivoshein
Tim O'Brien wrote:
>We make releases both source and binary, but why not just start cutting one
>release? I can understand why a product like HTTPD would be distributed
>without source, but the commons community consists of developers.
>
>Can anyone think of any good reason to preserve the current release
>structure.
>
>My apologizes in advance if this starts an endless flame war. I have a
>knack for that.
>
>-----
>Tim O'Brien
>tobrien@discursive.com
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [all] Instead of source and binary - one distribution
Posted by Ryan Hoegg <rh...@isisnetworks.net>.
Well a lot of times a commons component is a transitive dependency for a
project. I know I've never looked at the beanutils source but I have to
have it for my struts projects.
Also, jars in the public maven repositories should probably stay slim.
--
Ryan Hoegg
ISIS Networks
http://www.isisnetworks.net/
Tim O'Brien wrote:
>We make releases both source and binary, but why not just start cutting one
>release? I can understand why a product like HTTPD would be distributed
>without source, but the commons community consists of developers.
>
>Can anyone think of any good reason to preserve the current release
>structure.
>
>My apologizes in advance if this starts an endless flame war. I have a
>knack for that.
>
>-----
>Tim O'Brien
>tobrien@discursive.com
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: [all] Instead of source and binary - one distribution
Posted by Tim O'Brien <to...@discursive.com>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Cooper [mailto:martinc@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 4:45 PM
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: RE: [all] Instead of source and binary - one distribution
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Graham [mailto:grahamdavid1980@yahoo.com]
> > Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 2:34 PM
> > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> > Subject: Re: [all] Instead of source and binary - one distribution
> >
> >
> >
> > --- Tim O'Brien <to...@discursive.com> wrote:
> > > We make releases both source and binary, but why not just start
> > > cutting one release? I can understand why a product like HTTPD
> > > would be distributed without source, but the commons community
> > > consists of developers.
> > >
> > > Can anyone think of any good reason to preserve the
> current release
> > > structure.
> >
> > Even though we distribute to developers, most of them
> probably don't
> > care about the source. They care about adding the jar to their
> > project and looking at the javadocs. I just downloaded
> codec for use
> > in one of my projects and would have immmediately thrown away the
> > source if it was included. IMO, it's a waste of Apache's
> bandwidth to
> > distribute files users are just going to delete.
>
> +1. I am firmly against throwing everything into a single
> distribution.
>
> I thought we just had this discussion a few weeks ago, anyway...
>
Alright, issue is put to bed, sorry for the duplication.
Tim
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: [all] Instead of source and binary - one distribution
Posted by Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Graham [mailto:grahamdavid1980@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 2:34 PM
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [all] Instead of source and binary - one distribution
>
>
>
> --- Tim O'Brien <to...@discursive.com> wrote:
> > We make releases both source and binary, but why not just start cutting
> > one
> > release? I can understand why a product like HTTPD would be distributed
> > without source, but the commons community consists of developers.
> >
> > Can anyone think of any good reason to preserve the current release
> > structure.
>
> Even though we distribute to developers, most of them probably don't care
> about the source. They care about adding the jar to their project and
> looking at the javadocs. I just downloaded codec for use in one of my
> projects and would have immmediately thrown away the source if it was
> included. IMO, it's a waste of Apache's bandwidth to distribute files
> users are just going to delete.
+1. I am firmly against throwing everything into a single distribution.
I thought we just had this discussion a few weeks ago, anyway...
--
Martin Cooper
>
> David
>
> >
> > My apologizes in advance if this starts an endless flame war. I have a
> > knack for that.
> >
> > -----
> > Tim O'Brien
> > tobrien@discursive.com
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://messenger.yahoo.com/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [all] Instead of source and binary - one distribution
Posted by David Graham <gr...@yahoo.com>.
--- Tim O'Brien <to...@discursive.com> wrote:
> We make releases both source and binary, but why not just start cutting
> one
> release? I can understand why a product like HTTPD would be distributed
> without source, but the commons community consists of developers.
>
> Can anyone think of any good reason to preserve the current release
> structure.
Even though we distribute to developers, most of them probably don't care
about the source. They care about adding the jar to their project and
looking at the javadocs. I just downloaded codec for use in one of my
projects and would have immmediately thrown away the source if it was
included. IMO, it's a waste of Apache's bandwidth to distribute files
users are just going to delete.
David
>
> My apologizes in advance if this starts an endless flame war. I have a
> knack for that.
>
> -----
> Tim O'Brien
> tobrien@discursive.com
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org