On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 00:01:14 +0300, Artem Barger wrote:
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Gilles
<gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>
wrote:
The restriction, as Jörg wrote, is that a single component can only
release artifacts with the same version.
Ok, I think this is very common practice, as far as I recall
correctly
same
thing also happens in many other open source projects, Spring could
be an
example out of head. So even if you haven't changes in rng-core it
make
sense to align its release cycle w/ rng-tools.
-1
It doesn't make sense to release an unchanged codebase just because
tools that depend on it have changed!
If one has to do that, there is absolutely zero advantage in having
separate JARs.
The only way out is to create a separate project to collect the tools.
Thus I propose to drop that discussion out of the "[rng]" threads.
We can experiment with this (higher-level API, add-ons) within the
Commons Math repository.
There, it will be useful to think in terms of multiple modules as a
first step toward multiple components (or TLP). For example, I guess
that the contents of package "o.a.c.math4.random" could lead to a
separate JAR (functionally equivalent to "commons-rng-utils").
Regards,
Gilles
Best regards,
Artem Barger.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
