Gilles wrote: > Hi. > > The "Commons RNG" component (in the "Apache Commons" sense), > consists of the following modules (in the "maven" sense) that > provide Java code: > (1) commons-rng-client-api > (2) commons-rng-core > (3) commons-rng-simple > (4) commons-rng-sampling > (5) commons-rng-jmh > (6) commons-rng-examples > > One could see the RNG low-level "library" as composed of (1), > (2) and (3). > (4) is higher-level; it depends solely on the "UniformRandomProvider" > interface defined in (1). > (5) does not provide any functionality to application developers. > (6) contains working code that is either of interest to "Commons > RNG" contributors (for running the "stress" tests) or currently, > fairly trivial (and not recommended) examples of use of the > "library". > > Questions: > > a. Is it OK if the official release does not contain (5) and (6)? > [Rationale is that it would allow to make changes without > bothering about compatibility with _unintended_ uses.] > b. If so, is it still OK to provide JARs for them via the web site > (but not upload them to Nexus)? > c. Is it OK that the modules have different versions (reflecting > the perceived status of development)? > [This is related to the "commons-rng-sampling" issue of the > post with subject "Ralease policy for version < 1".]
c) does not make much sense to me. Even if we get it out of the door with out tooling, how will users find version 0.8 on our web site if it was part of release 1.0? What if we need a maintenance release 0.8.1 ... do we also need 1.0.1 for the rest? If not, why release it together with 1.0 at all? Or why not simply have an own component as Gilles requested in first place? Cheers, Jörg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
