On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > It would be good to have a definitive position on this. The VFS build > includes the javadoc and source jars in the distribution zip, even though > there is a separate source distribution zip (the source distribution is > complete while the source jar is only suitable for use by an IDE). I'm close > to doing another release attempt and would like to know if I need to change > that before I do it. >
Theres no right/wrong answer here and either way the release is good to go. IMO though these jars are useful to people who don't want to build from source but do want to see the source/javadocs int their IDE. The reason for taking them out AIUI it was *bloat* - but that seems a weak reason to me. I doubt anyone will complain about a few extra bytes in the binary distro - but some people might be disappointed to not find those jars. AFAIK we have set up all the other m2 builds in commons to include them. Up to you, but if it was me I would revert the change that dropped them from the binary distro. Niall > Ralph > > > On Nov 18, 2010, at 3:37 AM, Phil Steitz wrote: > >> On 11/18/10 5:04 AM, sebb wrote: >>> On 18 November 2010 07:22, Oliver Heger<oliver.he...@oliver-heger.de> >>> wrote: >>>> Build works fine with JDK 1.5 on Windows 7. Artifacts look good. >>>> >>>> The only nitpick I found is that the binary distribution does not contain >>>> the source and Javadocs jar. >>> >>> That's deliberate. >>> >>> It contains the Javadocs as individual files, so including the javadoc >>> jar is just wasted space, and if users want the source they can >>> download the source archive. >>> >>> As far as I was aware, the source and javadocs jars are intended for >>> Maven distribution only >> >> >> Personally I am fine not including these jars; but IIUC the reason people >> started including them a couple of years back was to make it easier for >> users using IDEs that make use of them. >> >> Not voting yet because I have not tested the release yet. >> >> Phil >>> >>>> So +1. >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>>> Oliver >>>> >>>> Am 17.11.2010 02:27, schrieb sebb: >>>>> >>>>> This is a vote to release Apache Commons NET 2.2 based on RC3. >>>>> >>>>> Changes since RC1 are: >>>>> - drop unnecessary jars from binary archive >>>>> - include RELEASE-NOTES in binary and source archives >>>>> >>>>> [ ] +1 release it >>>>> [ ] +0 go ahead I don't care >>>>> [ ] -1 no, do not release it because... >>>>> >>>>> tag: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/net/tags/NET_2_2_RC3/ >>>>> >>>>> site: http://people.apache.org/~sebb/NET_2_2_RC3/ >>>>> >>>>> Archives (Maven and non-Maven) have been uploaded to: >>>>> >>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-011/ >>>>> >>>>> Vote will remain open for at least 72 hours. >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>> >>>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
