Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9E7EE96B9 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:38:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 81476 invoked by uid 500); 26 Apr 2012 15:38:39 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 81392 invoked by uid 500); 26 Apr 2012 15:38:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 81384 invoked by uid 99); 26 Apr 2012 15:38:39 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:38:39 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2000.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.116] (HELO hel.zones.apache.org) (140.211.11.116) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:38:36 +0000 Received: from hel.zones.apache.org (hel.zones.apache.org [140.211.11.116]) by hel.zones.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5878410438 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:38:15 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:38:15 +0000 (UTC) From: "Dawid Weiss (JIRA)" To: dev@lucene.apache.org Message-ID: <828058287.5559.1335454695875.JavaMail.tomcat@hel.zones.apache.org> In-Reply-To: <1895788472.9710.1335276815214.JavaMail.tomcat@hel.zones.apache.org> Subject: [jira] [Commented] (SOLR-3405) maven artifacts should be equivalent to binary packaging MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3405?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13262676#comment-13262676 ] Dawid Weiss commented on SOLR-3405: ----------------------------------- bq By making it consistent with the other packaging people are less likely to complain, because then its not such a mystery and isnt a "separate/different product". I think that's the point David was making -- if you go with manual POM + released JARs packaging then things will actually be of poorer quality (and very likely broken) for lots of maven users. > maven artifacts should be equivalent to binary packaging > -------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: SOLR-3405 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3405 > Project: Solr > Issue Type: Task > Components: Build > Reporter: Robert Muir > Fix For: 4.1 > > > Lets take the commons-csv scenario: > * apache-solr-3.5.0 binary distribution contains no actual commons-csv.jar anywhere, > in fact it contains no third party jars (the stuff present in solr/lib) at all. > * binary distribution contains only the jars necessary for *solrj* and *contrib plugins*, and a solr.war > I think the maven artifacts should match whats in the binary release (no third party jars > inside the .war are "exposed", we just publish the .war itself). This exposes a lot less surface area. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org