Hi, sebb wrote:
> On 3 April 2013 11:12, Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org> wrote: > >> On 04/03/2013 11:48 AM, sebb wrote: >> >>> On 3 April 2013 06:56, Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>>> So building from the tag should be equivalent to building from the >>>>> source >>>>> archive. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Not necessary. Source distribution might have some pre-generated >>>>> code. >>>> Many projects work like that and some even require manual handcraft >>>> from release manager. >>>> >>>> >>>> The two should be identical except for the SVN files (and perhaps FOAF >>> etc >>> that only belong in SVN). >>> >>> >> Says who? Take a look at APR, Httpd, Tomcat (those are the one I know) >> > > It's true of all Commons components, and JMeter and HttpComponents. > > >> >> Third parties need to be able to build from the tag if they wish. >>> >>> >> You said earlier: >> >> "building from the tag should be equivalent to building from the source >> archive" >> >> This is clearly not the case with our products. >> > > It is true for the projects I am familiar with. > > >> I'm sure infrastructure team would very pleased with the idea that our >> main distribution media is SVN rather then maintaining all those >> mirroring around the world ;) >> > > That's irrelevant; it does not mean that 3rd parties have to build from > the SVN tag. > Merely that it should be possible to do so. > > Indeed that's what the CI systems (Buildr, Continuum, Jenkins) do. > Well, they don't use a tag, but they still build from SVN. > Which is another reason why having the SVN details is useful - it's > possible to track the source of a snapshot build. However, it is more than unfortunate that the manifest entry simply contains nonsense if it is not build from a checkout. Best would be an automated profile. - Jörg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
