[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#413518: RFP 413518 Wagon package - granularity

Marcus Better wrote:
> 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:
> I suggest one source file and several binary packages. This is because 
> (a) the top-level svn directory has a project file listing the other
> sub-modules, so it can be built together,
> (b) releases are tagged in the tags/ directory as "wagon-1.0-beta-2" etc
> with all the modules together (at least after alpha-7, where there are
> actually separate tags).
> If they ever start making separate releases it is not too hard to break up
> the source package.
> The binary packages should probably be separated, for instance a user could
> wish to install only one of the two ssh providers, or none of them.

I think we generally agreed that the best way was "one source package",
"many binary packages" (one per Jar). But I'm wondering if we should

Because of its "plug-in" architecture wagon has a number of very small
Jars. For example the "wagon-file" and "ssh-external" Jars each have
only one class in them. With separate binary packages we would end up
with a number of packages containing trivial Jars.

I suggest we use just one binary package (plus another -doc package, of
course). Does that sound OK to everybody?

(For the record, my original preference was for separate source packages
as well. That looks even worse now!).


Reply to: