www-community mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Leo Simons <leosim...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [proposal] daedalus jar repository (was: primary distribution location)
Date Wed, 26 Feb 2003 19:12:10 GMT
Costin Manolache wrote:

>>>What policy should we use for removing older versions ( or we just keep 
>>>everything ) ? 
>>>      
>>>
>>my take: keep everything. Again, policy should be the same as for the 
>>contents of /dist/. I dunno
>>if there is an asf-wide policy for that...looking at 
>>http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/old/, those guys
>>don't share my view :D
>>    
>>
>
>What about a "at least 6 months and 2 versions back" ?
>
quoting yourself, how about:
"+1 for each project/PMC choosing what to publish/remove." And you and I 
can recommend to each
project/PMC our respective preferred policy.

>>If you
>>feel like holding a vote, by all means feel free, I'll probably vote -1 
>>for deviating from the existing
>>format (unless you've got a good argument rather than preference; I 
>>share your preference but it
>>is just that ;)
>>    
>>
>There are few good arguments for both ways.
>
yep. I think the best argument is "common practice", and that's 
something which can be measured to
a degree.

>If we host external packages - some licenses prohibit modifications of the 
>binary distribution ( I read this as "you can't rename jars"). 
>
I think anyone who uses or accepts a license that dictates filenames is 
silly, but that could be just me :D

>It also seems to be a very common practice - almost all projects I know 
>use unversioned jars.
>
you and I work on different projects I guess!

If anyone feels like it, one could do actual statistical analysis on

http://cvs.apache.org/~leosimons/jars-in-cvs/

though one would have to compensate for the smart projects which don't 
keep binaries in CVS...

>I would say this beats the argument on the maven 
>practice ( that ruper is also supporting ). I see no reason why 
>a download tool can't accomodate both. 
>
me neither, but it sounds like more work again ;)

>On the other side - the practice on .so library supports the versioned
>jars, as well as the ability to have all .jars in a single dir and use the
>manifest to select the right version. 
>
not to mention apt, rpm, CPAN, PEAR (ie CPAN 4 PHP), OpenBSD, ...

>I think a vote would be necesary - I'll probably propose it in the 
>projects I participate in. Probably a global jakarta vote would also
>make sense - at least to gather what's the majority things and recommend 
>it. 
>
I say go for it (though I hope everyone shares my opinion :D)

>Since I don't think there is an absolute "right" - I obviously preffer a 
>majority decision, that would justify some pushing and work to get it
>adopted.
>
uhuh. There's that word again, "work". A good scientist is a lazy 
scientist. Does that hold for
programmers? (Are programmers scientists?) I say go for it though. 
Actually I just said it for
the second time. Not lazy enough yet, me.

cheers,

- Leo, sometime-to-be-scientist, and planning to be a good one



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


Mime
View raw message