incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Hogstrom <>
Subject Re: Binary dependencies in source releases (Was: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC0)
Date Thu, 29 Mar 2012 13:36:17 GMT
I mentioned this in another note but I'll repeat here to use your example.  Where the binaries
do live in a Maven repo and are versioned there is less of an issue and it becomes a convenience.
 A real challenge is what to do if your taking a "stable" copy of a project that doesn't have
a versioned release?  The only method I know of is to capture their source, and build a binary
at a stable level to include in your projects release.

Matt Hogstrom

A Day Without Nuclear Fusion Is a Day Without Sunshine

On Mar 29, 2012, at 9:07 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Jukka Zitting <> wrote:
>> ...It seems like Roy is much more categorical about this. Assuming I
>> understand his point correctly, *no* binary dependencies are
>> acceptable within a source tarball.
>> What I don't quite (yet) understand is how a reference like
>> "junit:junit:4.10" to a download service maintained by a third party
>> is more acceptable than directly including the referenced bits...
> I think the difference is that by saying "get junit:junit:4.10 to
> build this" we put the burden on our users to make sure they get the
> right bits, either by building them themselves from the junit sources,
> or trusting whoever provides them.
> By shipping those bits ourselves instead, we would take the
> responsibility on our shoulders, which we don't want.
> -Bertrand
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message