incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pedro Giffuni <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Moving Category-B tarballs (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Starting the graduation process)
Date Fri, 01 Jun 2012 19:10:29 GMT

Ugh ...

--- Ven 1/6/12, Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> ha scritto:
...

> 
> No release is buildable on its own.  You need an
> operating system, a compiler, often other pre-existing
> libraries on the system, other prerequisites that need
> to be installed by the developers.
>

And computers need electricity, which is not free and
not available under a compatible license. I wish you
could keep focused or at least do an effort to
understand the issues so we can solve them.

The tarball release must be consistent; we cannot hide
tarballs in SVN. Creating a directory with the Category-A
tarballs that form a base of the release along with the
base distribution is not really a problem. Some of them
are not available upstream anymore.

Pedro.





 
> Even in its cleanest form, a Java program using Maven, a
> release will
> not build until the user first installs Maven.
> 
> So no one (except maybe you) is arguing that our release
> should be
> buildable without any dependencies that are not included in
> the
> release.   The real questions should be
> thought of from the
> developer's perspective:
> 
> 1) What dependencies are mandatory and which ones are
> optional, needed
> only for specific features?
> 
> 2) What are the obligations that a developer has when they
> make use
> of, or modify code in a particular dependency?
> 
> 3) What do I need to provision my dev environment to build,
> with or
> without any given dependency.
> 
> What we do at Apache, providing open source software for the
> good, is
> directed to making things simple for the downstream
> consumers of our
> releases.
> 
> What we're doing with ext_sources is making #3 far easier,
> for the
> developer, compared to tracking down and fetching
> dependencies from
> other websites.  And I think we've taken the proper
> steps to provide
> information, build flags, NOTICE and LICENSE files to cover
> the other
> two concerns.
> 
> 
> >
> >
> >>
> >>>> We also agreed to clean up as much as
> possible of the dependencies to
> >>>> category-b stuff over time. But that takes
> time and is a lot of work.
> >>>
> >>> I admit this is very clear. I don't expect such
> development to be
> >>> a requirement for graduation but the transitory
> situation of a source
> >>> release that depends on carrying category-B
> tarballs in SVN now is
> >>> not really acceptable.
> >>
> >> well that is exactly the question. I don't know for
> sure if it is a real
> >> problem to have them in svn.
> >>
> >> svn or any other server would be equal as long as
> we don't
> >> change/improve the download part.
> >>
> >> So the real problem seems to be a different one.
> >>
> >
> > I will address the Category-B + patches issue on
> another email.
> >
> >
> 

Mime
View raw message