incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Question about downloading binaries
Date Mon, 02 Apr 2012 16:53:41 GMT
Karl,

I hope that you are making this too hard.

We don't care about the contents of someone else's binaries. If you
make and deploy a -deps  package of third-party binaries, as a
convenience for your users, it can contain any strange mixture of
sources and binaries it contains. If you provide a script to download
a third-party package, we don't care what it downloads so long as the
license is acceptable for a dependency.

I don't follow the logic that prevents you from having a release manager:

a) retrieve third-part sources
b) apply your patches from your svn
c) create -deps bundle
d) deploy to dist, appropriately marked as 'not an Apache release',

so long as the third-party material has an acceptable license in the
first place.

In case I'm wrong here, I'll ask: what is the build tool of choice for
ManifoldCF? On the other hand from all of these, perhaps there is, or
could be, a plugin for that build tool that could implement the
'patch' utility for you on Windows?



On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Karl Wright <daddywri@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry about the list cc'ing - the gmail client is fighting me today.
>
> To try and clarify, which will take some time I'm afraid:
>
> (1) The 0.5 version of the ManifoldCF release candidate was rejected
> because the tar contained binary dependencies.  The binary
> dependencies were checked into svn.  This has been standard practice
> for a decade or more for Java projects built with ant, but has now
> been deemed unacceptable.
> (2) In trying to find a solution which would still be convenient but
> not include binaries, we considered supplying ant logic that downloads
> the dependencies on demand.  The download would use binaries from the
> Maven repository, where possible.
> (3) In some cases, there is either no corresponding jar in the Maven
> repository, or there is a jar but it doesn't include critical patches.
> (4) In these cases, we needed to see whether there was another place
> those dependent jars could live.  They were in svn before, so one
> possibility was that they remain there.  Other possibilities include
> putting them into a googlecode repository, or downloading and building
> them as part of the overall build process.
>
>
>
> Hope this helps.
> Karl
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
>> Forward to list
>>
>> I can't answer your question as it's too abstract.  I don't understand
>> what you're trying to do from either infra@ or legal@ perspective.
>>
>> Karl Wright wrote on Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 12:21:17 -0400:
>>> "'svn patch' exists in 1.7."
>>>
>>> Ok, so that implies that we would create the patched jar by checking
>>> out the project tag from svn and using svn patch, not by downloading
>>> the source tarball.  Do you think it is ok to allow svn access as part
>>> of a project's build process?
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s@daniel.shahaf.name>
wrote:
>>> > 'svn patch' exists in 1.7.  (and tortoise includes svn.exe as an
>>> > optional component, I hear)
>>> >
>>> > Karl Wright wrote on Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 12:05:47 -0400:
>>> >> The patches are contained in SVN, yes, but the build process is
>>> >> structured to work on Windows as well as Linux, and there isn't a
>>> >> standard patch utility on Windows.
>>> >>
>>> >> We could insist that people only build on Linux, I suppose, but that
>>> >> would be a huge inconvenience for a lot of people.
>>> >>
>>> >> Karl
>>> >>
>>> >> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 11:47 AM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> > On 2 April 2012 16:36, Karl Wright <daddywri@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> >> >> From: Daniel Shahaf <d.s@daniel.shahaf.name>
>>> >> >> Date: Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 11:35 AM
>>> >> >> Subject: Re: Question about downloading binaries
>>> >> >> To: Karl Wright <daddywri@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> You didn't CC the list
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Karl Wright wrote on Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 11:33:56 -0400:
>>> >> >>> The patches for the dependencies for the main release are
sourced only
>>> >> >>> as part of the project in question at this time.  So there
is no other
>>> >> >>> logical place for them to live.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > The project SVN presumably contains the patches?
>>> >> > If not, it should.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > In which case, can't you download the source and apply the patches
as
>>> >> > part of the build process?
>>> >> >
>>> >> > This is what the Tomcat project does (though it's not changing
code,
>>> >> > just changing package names to avoid collisions).
>>> >> >
>>> >> >>> Karl
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s@daniel.shahaf.name>
wrote:
>>> >> >>> > Why do they have to be hosted on Apache infrastructure?
 The Subversion
>>> >> >>> > build depends on a C compiler but we don't host that
on ASF hardware.
>>> >> >>> >
>>> >> >>> > Karl Wright wrote on Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 11:16:22
-0400:
>>> >> >>> >> Hi folks,
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> As a result of a change in the way Java releases
must be structured,
>>> >> >>> >> we need to be able to download binary dependencies
as part of the
>>> >> >>> >> build process.  The problem is that we have some
binary dependencies
>>> >> >>> >> that contain patches, or are otherwise unsuitable
for being pushed to
>>> >> >>> >> the Maven repository.  What is the best place
in the Apache
>>> >> >>> >> infrastructure for keeping dependencies like this?
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> Thanks,
>>> >> >>> >> Karl

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message