On 9/26/06, David E Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sep 25, 2006, at 10:56 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote: > (FYI a source distribution is required but i'm assume that you know > how to svn export) Do you mean a separate source distribution is needed?
many would argue that for open source, the source distribution is the release: binaries are just for convenience :-) here are a couple of pragmatic (as well as the philosophical) reasons to issue source distributions: 1 downstream repackagers prefer to work from a pure source distribution. typically, they will take the source distribution and apply patches then build according to their system and then package. helping downstream distributors helps acceptance of the project. 2 source distributions encourage developers. new developers are needed to keep apache projects healthy.
In the past, as with this test snapshot, we have just included the source and binary in the same archive. This has suited us well as probably 70-80% of ofbiz is not compiled, ie script, configuration, etc files.
s binary distribution is any distribution that is not just a source export. it's not uncommon for binary distributions from apache to contain source. so, that sounds fine for your binary distribution. - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
