On 14/10/2011 17:40, David Jencks wrote: > > On Oct 14, 2011, at 9:18 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: > >> On 14/10/2011 17:09, David Jencks wrote: >>> If using a non-tomcat groupId is the only choice I'd keep the >>> openejb copy in apache svn. >> >> That is not an option that is acceptable to the ASF infrastructure >> team. > > In this context, it's pretty much equivalent to an ant based build > putting a bunch of jars used in the build in a lib directory in svn. > Has infra prohibited that?
<infra hat> Binary dependencies for any build process do not belong in svn. The infra team doesn't go looking for them but where a project is found using them then they will be encouraged to use a more appropriate approach. The more excessive the usage, the stronger the encouragement. The odd jar is not that big of an issue. I'm pretty sure Tomcat has a couple of JSTL jars in svn that go back to before my involvement with the project. However, ~100MB (it may be more I didn't look that closely) of Maven repo in svn is an issue that needs to be fixed. Mark </infra hat> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
