You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@tuscany.apache.org by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> on 2007/05/17 19:27:21 UTC
[DAS] Release distributions - PLEASE PROVIDE FEEDBACK
In this week DAS release IRC chat [1], Ant had a proposal to change the DAS
distributed artifacts.
We currently have the following distributions :
- Source : have das source implementation (M2)
- BInary : have DAS binaries and all necessary dependencies (M2)
- Sample : sample applications in binary form (war) with attached source
code and derby canned database (M2)
- Javadoc : DAS implementation javadoc (new after M2)
Ant's proposal would make the distribution layout probably like :
- Source : DAS source implementation
- Binary : have DAS binaries and all necessary dependencies + samples
binaries and derby canned database + javadoc
My personal opinion is that, combining the sample together with the binary
distribution would pollute the binary distribution, as the sample
distribution ship derby canned databases and is currently more then 2 times
the size of the binary distribution, without incorporating the new samples
done for the current release, but I'm open for the community point of view.
I'm probably ok to have javadoc distribution incorporated as part of the
binary distribution.
Please, express your thoughts..
[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev%40ws.apache.org/msg17832.html
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
Re: [DAS] Release distributions - PLEASE PROVIDE FEEDBACK
Posted by haleh mahbod <hm...@gmail.com>.
Most users who download binary would want samples. Therefore, they will end
up with the same size of package at the end of the road anyway.
It would be nice to have the same distribution across SDO and DAS.
On 5/17/07, Adriano Crestani <ad...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> As ant said, with the binary and samples together the distribution will
> follow the other projects' distributions and I think that the binary size
> won't be a problem.
>
> Anyway, I think the samples included in the binary wouldn't be clear for
> the
> downloader where the samples are or whether there are samples. So, with
> the
> samples separated would be easier for the downloader to find it.
>
> +1 to keep distribution layout
>
> Adriano Crestani
>
> On 5/17/07, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > In this week DAS release IRC chat [1], Ant had a proposal to change the
> > DAS
> > distributed artifacts.
> >
> > We currently have the following distributions :
> > - Source : have das source implementation (M2)
> > - BInary : have DAS binaries and all necessary dependencies (M2)
> > - Sample : sample applications in binary form (war) with attached
> > source
> > code and derby canned database (M2)
> > - Javadoc : DAS implementation javadoc (new after M2)
> >
> > Ant's proposal would make the distribution layout probably like :
> >
> > - Source : DAS source implementation
> > - Binary : have DAS binaries and all necessary dependencies + samples
> > binaries and derby canned database + javadoc
> >
> >
> > My personal opinion is that, combining the sample together with the
> binary
> > distribution would pollute the binary distribution, as the sample
> > distribution ship derby canned databases and is currently more then 2
> > times
> > the size of the binary distribution, without incorporating the new
> samples
> > done for the current release, but I'm open for the community point of
> > view.
> > I'm probably ok to have javadoc distribution incorporated as part of
> the
> > binary distribution.
> >
> > Please, express your thoughts..
> >
> > [1]
> http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev%40ws.apache.org/msg17832.html
> >
> > --
> > Luciano Resende
> > http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> >
>
Re: [DAS] Release distributions - PLEASE PROVIDE FEEDBACK
Posted by Adriano Crestani <ad...@apache.org>.
Hi,
As ant said, with the binary and samples together the distribution will
follow the other projects' distributions and I think that the binary size
won't be a problem.
Anyway, I think the samples included in the binary wouldn't be clear for the
downloader where the samples are or whether there are samples. So, with the
samples separated would be easier for the downloader to find it.
+1 to keep distribution layout
Adriano Crestani
On 5/17/07, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> In this week DAS release IRC chat [1], Ant had a proposal to change the
> DAS
> distributed artifacts.
>
> We currently have the following distributions :
> - Source : have das source implementation (M2)
> - BInary : have DAS binaries and all necessary dependencies (M2)
> - Sample : sample applications in binary form (war) with attached
> source
> code and derby canned database (M2)
> - Javadoc : DAS implementation javadoc (new after M2)
>
> Ant's proposal would make the distribution layout probably like :
>
> - Source : DAS source implementation
> - Binary : have DAS binaries and all necessary dependencies + samples
> binaries and derby canned database + javadoc
>
>
> My personal opinion is that, combining the sample together with the binary
> distribution would pollute the binary distribution, as the sample
> distribution ship derby canned databases and is currently more then 2
> times
> the size of the binary distribution, without incorporating the new samples
> done for the current release, but I'm open for the community point of
> view.
> I'm probably ok to have javadoc distribution incorporated as part of the
> binary distribution.
>
> Please, express your thoughts..
>
> [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev%40ws.apache.org/msg17832.html
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
>