commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Henri Yandell" <>
Subject Re: [all] What's in a distribution?
Date Tue, 02 Jan 2007 23:33:15 GMT
On 1/2/07, Dennis Lundberg <> wrote:
> Hi
> I've been looking at creating distributions for commons logging using
> Maven 2. So I did some reading on ASF policy regarding distributions and
> poked around in different commons components, to see if I could find a
> least common denominator.
> Unfortunately I haven't. So I've got a couple of questions for you to
> think about:
> 1. What should a source distribution include?
> 2. What should a binary distribution include?


> What are your thoughts on this subject?

I rarely download a zip file - my use cases are:

* Want to use the project  -> download jar from ibiblio. Unless I'm
using Maven as the build tool, in which case I'd figure out its
details and put them in my pom.

* Want to build/investigate a historic project. My first port of call
is the svn tags, but some are just plain confusing so I use the source

* Want to look at javadoc - I look at the online javadoc.

Other use case I've had in the past:

* Want to publish javadoc internally. Download the binary dist just to
get the javadoc.

And one I know exists at some big companies:

* Grab the source zip so a trusted version can be built from it.
Though I don't know if they use an svn tag when they can. I would :)

+1 to Craig's opine that the source distro should be able to create
the binary distro. I'm quite happy to merge the source and binary
distributions into one, having two seems quite pointless. I thought
Maven repository 'distributions' had gone away, so I need to go learn
about them again.

I dislike the website being put in the distributions. It's a cheap way
to think you're documenting your project; but having the documentation
in there is good. I think the solution to this part is to make our
websites leaner (by moving things into Jakarta's site and nightly
builds) so that what is left is a better fit for going in the

Defining the distribution/assembly in the super pom would be great. I
think it would be valuable to put the non-optional dependencies in
there too, but I can see that that might hit problems (VFS's LGPL
dependency for example).


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message