cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jeff Ramsdale" <jefe...@earthlink.net>
Subject RE: Ant/Maven/Centipede discussion
Date Tue, 30 Sep 2003 16:22:01 GMT


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:stefano@apache.org]

<snip>

> > I was curious about this a few weeks ago so I did an experiment in
> > automating the build of a Fins (the charting package) block into
> > Cocoon.
> > I'll include my build.xml for context. The experiment was mostly
> > successful
> > (though I've never heard back from the Fins developers I sent it to),
> > with a
> > couple of caveats. I'm sure Blocks: The Next Generation will be more
> > complicated than the current blocks but the techniques at the ANT
> > level will
> > undoubtedly be similar.
>
> There is a general "purist" attitude of ant users not to write your own
> java tasks but to complicate the build.xml file. I am, personally, in
> favor of writing code when it makes sense to (like for the xpatch ant
> task we have)
>
> I think we'll end up doing the same for the block, expecially for the
> coordination with the block descriptors (reading/writing) and block
> librarian (discovery/fetching/metadata)

That makes sense. Any idea why no one (that I know of) has implemented patch
(as opposed to xpatch) as an Ant task? I looked around and couldn't find an
implementation.

<snip subject="LPGPL question" />

> The fact that modifications are done by hand or automatically doesn't
> make any difference.
>
> The fact that you are distributing a modified LGPL library requires
> that the patches you apply are under LGPL as well, but only those (if
> you stick one interpretation of LGPL that is not viral for java classes
> that import LGPLed ones. in another interpretation, there is no
> difference between LGPL and GPL for java code... nobody knows which
> interpretation can be said correct and the FSF never issued a statement
> that can be said official on this matter)

Well, see that's the question. There's no library being distributed, just an
Ant script that pulls the library down when building. From the users'
perspective the library might as well be part of the package when doing the
build (as long as they're on-line) but if the real issue is distribution and
not use then there isn't an issue because we (as Cocoon developers or as
3rd-party block-writers) aren't redistributing their LGPL code.

> --
> Stefano.

Jeff



Mime
View raw message