From general-return-27637-apmail-incubator-general-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org Thu Jan 06 18:50:15 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 64229 invoked from network); 6 Jan 2011 18:50:13 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Jan 2011 18:50:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 42780 invoked by uid 500); 6 Jan 2011 18:50:13 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 42597 invoked by uid 500); 6 Jan 2011 18:50:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 42589 invoked by uid 99); 6 Jan 2011 18:50:13 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 18:50:13 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RFC_ABUSE_POST,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of daddywri@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.175 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.214.175] (HELO mail-iw0-f175.google.com) (209.85.214.175) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 18:50:06 +0000 Received: by iwn8 with SMTP id 8so16954462iwn.6 for ; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 10:49:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=XkIUw+ilmOx0IZYoufFWZ+pjHD5PmfUgFyrfDGqhfVU=; b=jCq+qkS3MYIZZa1q1DnB0eB6giGVgjYd4APwpOUTXfOIqA4i7GnCiC599E8O97ZBOK P0Yxy9QMXQdr1Vn72tSOM/rw/LpyDEVFM/1qHuy21qHvVVmtZVG4jFFrk01HFKdtczqL FbboZMoCncnDJDijJ5Axa8bi1iLSs5sr/CLz0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=P6S+Twh1kXbsDa+VE5HvlmrGxNx8U8tInSBZ0JjzUo4LQ9Zc5IFhA7ngfJR0h7c9TB iWaP0qPluCt6QkRgkAeG0E3GL1Ngd311wqDg9VXYz0xqV99Bq9AX2akk6Sfrq3tQY0Jc wvpDjbikgCDx48Mn+Yu1N9S5wzCl+NFMm79Po= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.11.2 with SMTP id r2mr8311538ibr.174.1294339786305; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 10:49:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.13.134 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Jan 2011 10:49:46 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <9AC3E6B5-9A4D-4509-99D1-438BDE57EA88@apache.org> <5F452B6A-E8B9-4454-9B09-8AED252F7499@jpl.nasa.gov> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 13:49:46 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1 From: Karl Wright To: general@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The whole question of ease-of-use is what drove this packaging arrangement. I was told it was unacceptable to not have a working example out of the box that could be executed in a single line. Build and execution Instructions which involve obtaining a couple of dozen jars from other places do not fulfill this criterion. The three copies of the dependent jars occur because of the following: - There is one copy of the jar that is used by the build - There are two distinct execution environments, one single-process, and one multi-process, that are built - Each execution environment has its own subtree that it executes from If the built environments are no longer distributed, then there will be one copy of each dependent jar included. I'm leaning towards just having this minimum distribution since size is apparently a huge issue here. I still want to know if the source distribution should have the forrest-built docs or not, though, or whether it should be up to the user to build their own docs using Forrest themselves. I would prefer the former because Forrest is somewhat idiosyncratic, but you guys are the bosses. Karl On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 1:39 PM, sebb wrote: > On 6 January 2011 18:23, Karl Wright wrote: >>>> Very well; we will discontinue all binary distributions. >>> >>> That's not what I said. >>> >>> You can have a binary distribution if you wish, but there must be a >>> source distribution. >>> >> >> As I said before, it makes no sense to distribute ManifoldCF binaries >> without complete sources. =A0So we could (I suppose) have a source >> distribution AND a source+binary distribution. > > That would be fine. > >> =A0But we could not simply have a binary distribution and a source distr= ibution. > > That would also work, but would require binary users to download both arc= hives. > > =3D=3D > > On a separate matter, I question whether the current packaging is optimal= . > There appear to be 3 copies of every jar in the binary zip file - no > wonder the file is so large! > > Also, many of the included jars are commonly used elsewhere, so the > consumer may well already have a copy. > > Generally, the binary jar consists of the compiled source files only. > > Some projects provide additional bundles which include all the > required dependencies; that might be the way to go here. > >> Karl >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org