On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 09:56:47AM +0100, Paul Cager wrote: > Michael Koch wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 11:29:35PM +0100, Paul Cager wrote: > >> The maven2 distribution contains about 7 wagon jars (wagon-file, > >> wagon-http-shared etc). What would be the best way to package this: > >> > >> A) Seven source packages (and hence seven binary packages). > >> B) One source package generating seven binary packages. > >> C) One source package generating one binary package (one big jar). > >> D) Doesn't matter / something else. > >> > >> I'm rather in favour of the first option. What's the general view? > > > > Are all source packages normally release in sync? If yes I would prefer > > one big source package which includes the tarballs of all releases and > > builds either seven binary packages or one binary package with 7 jars. > > I think I would prefer the later one. > > Upstream do not release source tarballs - access is by svn. It looks to > me as though all of the Jars are released in sync (although I may be a > bit confused, since the ibiblio repos has version 1.0-alpha-4, and the > maven download contains 1.0-beta-2, and some things have been renamed).
Horrible. > I guess if we produce one source package then we should package _all_ of > wagon, not just the bits needed by maven. It don't think this will be a > problem, as it doesn't look like it will pull in any additional > dependencies. Good idea. That sounds like a good solution. Cheers, Michael -- .''`. | Michael Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' : | Free Java Developer <http://www.classpath.org> `. `' | `- | 1024D/BAC5 4B28 D436 95E6 F2E0 BD11 5923 A008 2763 483B -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
