Re: RFP 413518 Wagon package - granularity
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 09:56:47AM +0100, Paul Cager wrote:
> Michael Koch wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 11:29:35PM +0100, Paul Cager wrote:
> >> The maven2 distribution contains about 7 wagon jars (wagon-file,
> >> wagon-http-shared etc). What would be the best way to package this:
> >>
> >> A) Seven source packages (and hence seven binary packages).
> >> B) One source package generating seven binary packages.
> >> C) One source package generating one binary package (one big jar).
> >> D) Doesn't matter / something else.
> >>
> >> I'm rather in favour of the first option. What's the general view?
> >
> > Are all source packages normally release in sync? If yes I would prefer
> > one big source package which includes the tarballs of all releases and
> > builds either seven binary packages or one binary package with 7 jars.
> > I think I would prefer the later one.
>
> Upstream do not release source tarballs - access is by svn. It looks to
> me as though all of the Jars are released in sync (although I may be a
> bit confused, since the ibiblio repos has version 1.0-alpha-4, and the
> maven download contains 1.0-beta-2, and some things have been renamed).
Horrible.
> I guess if we produce one source package then we should package _all_ of
> wagon, not just the bits needed by maven. It don't think this will be a
> problem, as it doesn't look like it will pull in any additional
> dependencies.
Good idea. That sounds like a good solution.
Cheers,
Michael
--
.''`. | Michael Koch <konqueror@gmx.de>
: :' : | Free Java Developer <http://www.classpath.org>
`. `' |
`- | 1024D/BAC5 4B28 D436 95E6 F2E0 BD11 5923 A008 2763 483B
Reply to: