cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <>
Subject Re: "Normal" release artifacts
Date Sat, 15 Mar 2008 12:03:21 GMT
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> Reinhard Poetz wrote:
> >Reinhard Poetz wrote:
> >>
> >>I have started to write some Ant scripts to produce non-Maven  
> >>release artifacts. This will of course help everybody who doesn't  
> >>want to use Maven or Ivy for dependency management but will also  
> >>bundle all the information that belongs together (src, binaries,  
> >>docs, javadocs, licensing information).
> >>Most of the work has been finished but now I got stuck with the  
> >>question if we should ship third-party libs or not. E.g. for the  
> >>Spring configurator this would be everything listed at 
> >>

> >>. The advantages are that the user gets everything that she needs  but 
> >>the disadvantages are that we would have to add all license  files of all 
> >>3rd-party libs (AFAIK there is no automatic mechanism  for that) and the 
> >>download size would increase. And I think that in  2008 you shouldn't 
> >>manage your library dependency graph manually  anymore in your projects 
> >>(Maven, Ivy, the Maven Ant tasks are of  great help and at least the last 
> >>one is very easy to use.)
> >>Finally, if we decide to ship 3rd party libs, one technical question:
> >>Am I right that there is no automatic mechanism for Ant or Maven  
> >>that pulls together all license information of all 3rd-party libs?

That would be good. At Forrest, we have similar issues
not yet solved.

> >>And, if we decide to not ship 3rd party libs, am I right that we  
> >>don't have to add license files of them? (Otherwise all artifacts  
> >>on the central Maven repository would be legally broken ...)
> >>Any comments?

Perhaps legal-discuss@ list can help.

> >Anyone?
> >
> >If I don't hear anything I will *not* include any third-party stuff  
> >(the only exception will be the getting-started stuff).
> >
> >Users will have to download all libraries themselves.
> IMHO what's good a downloadable release if ' run' does not  
> work? One of the points of such release is to make it one stop shop,  
> to get everything up and running in one quick download. May be it's  
> just me. Shrug.

What does the "getting-started stuff" include?
Perhaps we include the bare minimum and list
exactly the other supporting products that they
need to go further.

Any supporting products that we do bundle,
need their source too.


View raw message