Housekeeping of jar files

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

Hi all,

the following are housekeeping tasks that could be part of the "SlimDown" roadmap we could do (help from the community would be highly appreciated) related to the big number of jar files bundled with OFBiz:

* making sure all jar files are marked as binary
* making sure they are listed properly in LICENSE (and if required NOTICE) file
* making sure we are running stable versions and not snapshots (whenever possible)
* upgrade jars to use latest versions (whenever possible)
* remove jars no more needed
* rename old jars to add release numbers in the file name

Any ideas on how to document compilation and runtime dependencies, purpose and versions of each jars bundled in OFBiz?
A useful (but outdated/incomplete) source of information is this page:

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz

You may have noticed that in the last few days I already started the work of upgrading some jars, setting the file properties to binary etc..

I have also identified a few jars that may not be needed anymore, but I would like your help/input in figuring out if we can actually remove them; in fact, even if I was able to compile and run successfully all tests it is still not guaranteed that some of them may be used under special conditions at runtime (this is true for all jars):

framework/base/lib/ant/ant-nodeps-1.8.1.jar
framework/base/lib/Tidy.jar
framework/base/lib/ant-trax-1.8.0.jar
framework/base/lib/commons/commons-vfs-20070730.jar

There may be other files in the same condition.

Kind regards,

Jacopo

[Pierre Smits]

Hi Jacopo,

How about using Apache Ivy more to manage dependencies. That way OFBiz
should reduce in size dramatically and the modifications of the licence and
notice file are trimmed down considerably.

Regards,

Pierre

Op 11 april 2012 18:49 schreef Jacopo Cappellato <
[hidden email]> het volgende:

> Hi all,
>
> the following are housekeeping tasks that could be part of the "SlimDown"
> roadmap we could do (help from the community would be highly appreciated)
> related to the big number of jar files bundled with OFBiz:
>
> * making sure all jar files are marked as binary
> * making sure they are listed properly in LICENSE (and if required NOTICE)
> file
> * making sure we are running stable versions and not snapshots (whenever
> possible)
> * upgrade jars to use latest versions (whenever possible)
> * remove jars no more needed
> * rename old jars to add release numbers in the file name
>
> Any ideas on how to document compilation and runtime dependencies, purpose
> and versions of each jars bundled in OFBiz?
> A useful (but outdated/incomplete) source of information is this page:
>
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz
>
> You may have noticed that in the last few days I already started the work
> of upgrading some jars, setting the file properties to binary etc..
>
> I have also identified a few jars that may not be needed anymore, but I
> would like your help/input in figuring out if we can actually remove them;
> in fact, even if I was able to compile and run successfully all tests it is
> still not guaranteed that some of them may be used under special conditions
> at runtime (this is true for all jars):
>
> framework/base/lib/ant/ant-nodeps-1.8.1.jar
> framework/base/lib/Tidy.jar
> framework/base/lib/ant-trax-1.8.0.jar
> framework/base/lib/commons/commons-vfs-20070730.jar
>
> There may be other files in the same condition.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Jacopo
>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

The problem with this approach: it does not work if you don't have an Internet connection: blocking

-1

Jacques

From: "Pierre Smits" <[hidden email]>

> Hi Jacopo,
>
> How about using Apache Ivy more to manage dependencies. That way OFBiz
> should reduce in size dramatically and the modifications of the licence and
> notice file are trimmed down considerably.
>
> Regards,
>
> Pierre
>
> Op 11 april 2012 18:49 schreef Jacopo Cappellato <
> [hidden email]> het volgende:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> the following are housekeeping tasks that could be part of the "SlimDown"
>> roadmap we could do (help from the community would be highly appreciated)
>> related to the big number of jar files bundled with OFBiz:
>>
>> * making sure all jar files are marked as binary
>> * making sure they are listed properly in LICENSE (and if required NOTICE)
>> file
>> * making sure we are running stable versions and not snapshots (whenever
>> possible)
>> * upgrade jars to use latest versions (whenever possible)
>> * remove jars no more needed
>> * rename old jars to add release numbers in the file name
>>
>> Any ideas on how to document compilation and runtime dependencies, purpose
>> and versions of each jars bundled in OFBiz?
>> A useful (but outdated/incomplete) source of information is this page:
>>
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz
>>
>> You may have noticed that in the last few days I already started the work
>> of upgrading some jars, setting the file properties to binary etc..
>>
>> I have also identified a few jars that may not be needed anymore, but I
>> would like your help/input in figuring out if we can actually remove them;
>> in fact, even if I was able to compile and run successfully all tests it is
>> still not guaranteed that some of them may be used under special conditions
>> at runtime (this is true for all jars):
>>
>> framework/base/lib/ant/ant-nodeps-1.8.1.jar
>> framework/base/lib/Tidy.jar
>> framework/base/lib/ant-trax-1.8.0.jar
>> framework/base/lib/commons/commons-vfs-20070730.jar
>>
>> There may be other files in the same condition.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
>>
>

[Pierre Smits]

If you don't have an internet connection, you wouldn't be able to download
OFBiz.

Op 11 april 2012 22:44 schreef Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]
> het volgende:

> The problem with this approach: it does not work if you don't have an
> Internet connection: blocking
>
> -1
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "Pierre Smits" <[hidden email]>
>
>  Hi Jacopo,
>>
>> How about using Apache Ivy more to manage dependencies. That way OFBiz
>> should reduce in size dramatically and the modifications of the licence
>> and
>> notice file are trimmed down considerably.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Pierre
>>
>> Op 11 april 2012 18:49 schreef Jacopo Cappellato <
>> jacopo.cappellato@hotwaxmedia.**com <[hidden email]>>
>> het volgende:
>>
>>  Hi all,
>>>
>>> the following are housekeeping tasks that could be part of the "SlimDown"
>>> roadmap we could do (help from the community would be highly appreciated)
>>> related to the big number of jar files bundled with OFBiz:
>>>
>>> * making sure all jar files are marked as binary
>>> * making sure they are listed properly in LICENSE (and if required
>>> NOTICE)
>>> file
>>> * making sure we are running stable versions and not snapshots (whenever
>>> possible)
>>> * upgrade jars to use latest versions (whenever possible)
>>> * remove jars no more needed
>>> * rename old jars to add release numbers in the file name
>>>
>>> Any ideas on how to document compilation and runtime dependencies,
>>> purpose
>>> and versions of each jars bundled in OFBiz?
>>> A useful (but outdated/incomplete) source of information is this page:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OFBADMIN/**
>>> Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz>
>>>
>>> You may have noticed that in the last few days I already started the work
>>> of upgrading some jars, setting the file properties to binary etc..
>>>
>>> I have also identified a few jars that may not be needed anymore, but I
>>> would like your help/input in figuring out if we can actually remove
>>> them;
>>> in fact, even if I was able to compile and run successfully all tests it
>>> is
>>> still not guaranteed that some of them may be used under special
>>> conditions
>>> at runtime (this is true for all jars):
>>>
>>> framework/base/lib/ant/ant-**nodeps-1.8.1.jar
>>> framework/base/lib/Tidy.jar
>>> framework/base/lib/ant-trax-1.**8.0.jar
>>> framework/base/lib/commons/**commons-vfs-20070730.jar
>>>
>>> There may be other files in the same condition.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Jacopo
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>

[Jacques Le Roux-3]

There are situations where you are able to download and then deploy where you don't have a connection. If then things change it can
turn in a nightmare
Also there are situations where, etc... Think about it, not only your way...

It's ok for secondary libs, and most often used for those we can't upload to ASF repo because they don't have the right license.
Else it does not worth the trouble.

This said it was a good idea ;o)

Jacques

From: "Pierre Smits" <[hidden email]>

> If you don't have an internet connection, you wouldn't be able to download
> OFBiz.
>
> Op 11 april 2012 22:44 schreef Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]
>> het volgende:
>
>> The problem with this approach: it does not work if you don't have an
>> Internet connection: blocking
>>
>> -1
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>> From: "Pierre Smits" <[hidden email]>
>>
>>  Hi Jacopo,
>>>
>>> How about using Apache Ivy more to manage dependencies. That way OFBiz
>>> should reduce in size dramatically and the modifications of the licence
>>> and
>>> notice file are trimmed down considerably.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Pierre
>>>
>>> Op 11 april 2012 18:49 schreef Jacopo Cappellato <
>>> jacopo.cappellato@hotwaxmedia.**com <[hidden email]>>
>>> het volgende:
>>>
>>>  Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> the following are housekeeping tasks that could be part of the "SlimDown"
>>>> roadmap we could do (help from the community would be highly appreciated)
>>>> related to the big number of jar files bundled with OFBiz:
>>>>
>>>> * making sure all jar files are marked as binary
>>>> * making sure they are listed properly in LICENSE (and if required
>>>> NOTICE)
>>>> file
>>>> * making sure we are running stable versions and not snapshots (whenever
>>>> possible)
>>>> * upgrade jars to use latest versions (whenever possible)
>>>> * remove jars no more needed
>>>> * rename old jars to add release numbers in the file name
>>>>
>>>> Any ideas on how to document compilation and runtime dependencies,
>>>> purpose
>>>> and versions of each jars bundled in OFBiz?
>>>> A useful (but outdated/incomplete) source of information is this page:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OFBADMIN/**
>>>> Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz>
>>>>
>>>> You may have noticed that in the last few days I already started the work
>>>> of upgrading some jars, setting the file properties to binary etc..
>>>>
>>>> I have also identified a few jars that may not be needed anymore, but I
>>>> would like your help/input in figuring out if we can actually remove
>>>> them;
>>>> in fact, even if I was able to compile and run successfully all tests it
>>>> is
>>>> still not guaranteed that some of them may be used under special
>>>> conditions
>>>> at runtime (this is true for all jars):
>>>>
>>>> framework/base/lib/ant/ant-**nodeps-1.8.1.jar
>>>> framework/base/lib/Tidy.jar
>>>> framework/base/lib/ant-trax-1.**8.0.jar
>>>> framework/base/lib/commons/**commons-vfs-20070730.jar
>>>>
>>>> There may be other files in the same condition.
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>
>>>> Jacopo
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>

[Pierre Smits]

Sometims my privileges get in the way of reason. ;-)

Op 11 april 2012 22:58 schreef Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]> het
volgende:

> There are situations where you are able to download and then deploy where
> you don't have a connection. If then things change it can turn in a
> nightmare
> Also there are situations where, etc... Think about it, not only your
> way...
>
> It's ok for secondary libs, and most often used for those we can't upload
> to ASF repo because they don't have the right license. Else it does not
> worth the trouble.
>
> This said it was a good idea ;o)
>
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "Pierre Smits" <[hidden email]>
>
>> If you don't have an internet connection, you wouldn't be able to download
>> OFBiz.
>>
>> Op 11 april 2012 22:44 schreef Jacques Le Roux <
>> [hidden email]
>>
>>> het volgende:
>>>
>>
>>  The problem with this approach: it does not work if you don't have an
>>> Internet connection: blocking
>>>
>>> -1
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>> From: "Pierre Smits" <[hidden email]>
>>>
>>>  Hi Jacopo,
>>>
>>>>
>>>> How about using Apache Ivy more to manage dependencies. That way OFBiz
>>>> should reduce in size dramatically and the modifications of the licence
>>>> and
>>>> notice file are trimmed down considerably.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Pierre
>>>>
>>>> Op 11 april 2012 18:49 schreef Jacopo Cappellato <
>>>> jacopo.cappellato@hotwaxmedia.****com <jacopo.cappellato@**
>>>> hotwaxmedia.com <[hidden email]>>>
>>>> het volgende:
>>>>
>>>>  Hi all,
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> the following are housekeeping tasks that could be part of the
>>>>> "SlimDown"
>>>>> roadmap we could do (help from the community would be highly
>>>>> appreciated)
>>>>> related to the big number of jar files bundled with OFBiz:
>>>>>
>>>>> * making sure all jar files are marked as binary
>>>>> * making sure they are listed properly in LICENSE (and if required
>>>>> NOTICE)
>>>>> file
>>>>> * making sure we are running stable versions and not snapshots
>>>>> (whenever
>>>>> possible)
>>>>> * upgrade jars to use latest versions (whenever possible)
>>>>> * remove jars no more needed
>>>>> * rename old jars to add release numbers in the file name
>>>>>
>>>>> Any ideas on how to document compilation and runtime dependencies,
>>>>> purpose
>>>>> and versions of each jars bundled in OFBiz?
>>>>> A useful (but outdated/incomplete) source of information is this page:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/****confluence/display/OFBADMIN/**<https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OFBADMIN/**>
>>>>> Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz<ht**tps://cwiki.apache.org/**
>>>>> confluence/display/OFBADMIN/**Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz>
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You may have noticed that in the last few days I already started the
>>>>> work
>>>>> of upgrading some jars, setting the file properties to binary etc..
>>>>>
>>>>> I have also identified a few jars that may not be needed anymore, but I
>>>>> would like your help/input in figuring out if we can actually remove
>>>>> them;
>>>>> in fact, even if I was able to compile and run successfully all tests
>>>>> it
>>>>> is
>>>>> still not guaranteed that some of them may be used under special
>>>>> conditions
>>>>> at runtime (this is true for all jars):
>>>>>
>>>>> framework/base/lib/ant/ant-****nodeps-1.8.1.jar
>>>>> framework/base/lib/Tidy.jar
>>>>> framework/base/lib/ant-trax-1.****8.0.jar
>>>>> framework/base/lib/commons/****commons-vfs-20070730.jar
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> There may be other files in the same condition.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacopo
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>

[Adrian Crum-3]

I believe Tidy is used by some of the HTTP client libraries, and Commons
VFS was used by Webslinger (it might be used currently by Jackrabbit).

-Adrian

On 4/11/2012 5:49 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> the following are housekeeping tasks that could be part of the "SlimDown" roadmap we could do (help from the community would be highly appreciated) related to the big number of jar files bundled with OFBiz:
>
> * making sure all jar files are marked as binary
> * making sure they are listed properly in LICENSE (and if required NOTICE) file
> * making sure we are running stable versions and not snapshots (whenever possible)
> * upgrade jars to use latest versions (whenever possible)
> * remove jars no more needed
> * rename old jars to add release numbers in the file name
>
> Any ideas on how to document compilation and runtime dependencies, purpose and versions of each jars bundled in OFBiz?
> A useful (but outdated/incomplete) source of information is this page:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz
>
> You may have noticed that in the last few days I already started the work of upgrading some jars, setting the file properties to binary etc..
>
> I have also identified a few jars that may not be needed anymore, but I would like your help/input in figuring out if we can actually remove them; in fact, even if I was able to compile and run successfully all tests it is still not guaranteed that some of them may be used under special conditions at runtime (this is true for all jars):
>
> framework/base/lib/ant/ant-nodeps-1.8.1.jar
> framework/base/lib/Tidy.jar
> framework/base/lib/ant-trax-1.8.0.jar
> framework/base/lib/commons/commons-vfs-20070730.jar
>
> There may be other files in the same condition.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Jacopo
>

[Rajbir Saini]

BTW, how to you checkout OFBiz or download the source if there is no
Internet connection. I know we can build with Maven without Internect
connection once you have downloaded the dependencies when you build
first time. Also, OFBiz similar to other should have a different binary
release and generally binary releases have all the dependencies bundled.
Binary releases are for the end users and not developers.

Thanks,

Raj

On Thursday 12 April 2012 02:14 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> The problem with this approach: it does not work if you don't have an
> Internet connection: blocking
>
> -1
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "Pierre Smits" <[hidden email]>
>> Hi Jacopo,
>>
>> How about using Apache Ivy more to manage dependencies. That way OFBiz
>> should reduce in size dramatically and the modifications of the
>> licence and
>> notice file are trimmed down considerably.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Pierre
>>
>> Op 11 april 2012 18:49 schreef Jacopo Cappellato <
>> [hidden email]> het volgende:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> the following are housekeeping tasks that could be part of the
>>> "SlimDown"
>>> roadmap we could do (help from the community would be highly
>>> appreciated)
>>> related to the big number of jar files bundled with OFBiz:
>>>
>>> * making sure all jar files are marked as binary
>>> * making sure they are listed properly in LICENSE (and if required
>>> NOTICE)
>>> file
>>> * making sure we are running stable versions and not snapshots
>>> (whenever
>>> possible)
>>> * upgrade jars to use latest versions (whenever possible)
>>> * remove jars no more needed
>>> * rename old jars to add release numbers in the file name
>>>
>>> Any ideas on how to document compilation and runtime dependencies,
>>> purpose
>>> and versions of each jars bundled in OFBiz?
>>> A useful (but outdated/incomplete) source of information is this page:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz 
>>>
>>>
>>> You may have noticed that in the last few days I already started the
>>> work
>>> of upgrading some jars, setting the file properties to binary etc..
>>>
>>> I have also identified a few jars that may not be needed anymore, but I
>>> would like your help/input in figuring out if we can actually remove
>>> them;
>>> in fact, even if I was able to compile and run successfully all
>>> tests it is
>>> still not guaranteed that some of them may be used under special
>>> conditions
>>> at runtime (this is true for all jars):
>>>
>>> framework/base/lib/ant/ant-nodeps-1.8.1.jar
>>> framework/base/lib/Tidy.jar
>>> framework/base/lib/ant-trax-1.8.0.jar
>>> framework/base/lib/commons/commons-vfs-20070730.jar
>>>
>>> There may be other files in the same condition.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Jacopo
>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

Thanks Adrian,

I can confirm that Commons VFS was used by Webslinger... can someone confirm that it is now required by Jackrabbit? And if yes, what is the version required by Jackrabbit? Can we at least use a stable version of it rather than a snapshot?

Jacopo

On Apr 12, 2012, at 9:23 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:

> I believe Tidy is used by some of the HTTP client libraries, and Commons VFS was used by Webslinger (it might be used currently by Jackrabbit).
>
> -Adrian
>
> On 4/11/2012 5:49 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> the following are housekeeping tasks that could be part of the "SlimDown" roadmap we could do (help from the community would be highly appreciated) related to the big number of jar files bundled with OFBiz:
>>
>> * making sure all jar files are marked as binary
>> * making sure they are listed properly in LICENSE (and if required NOTICE) file
>> * making sure we are running stable versions and not snapshots (whenever possible)
>> * upgrade jars to use latest versions (whenever possible)
>> * remove jars no more needed
>> * rename old jars to add release numbers in the file name
>>
>> Any ideas on how to document compilation and runtime dependencies, purpose and versions of each jars bundled in OFBiz?
>> A useful (but outdated/incomplete) source of information is this page:
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz
>>
>> You may have noticed that in the last few days I already started the work of upgrading some jars, setting the file properties to binary etc..
>>
>> I have also identified a few jars that may not be needed anymore, but I would like your help/input in figuring out if we can actually remove them; in fact, even if I was able to compile and run successfully all tests it is still not guaranteed that some of them may be used under special conditions at runtime (this is true for all jars):
>>
>> framework/base/lib/ant/ant-nodeps-1.8.1.jar
>> framework/base/lib/Tidy.jar
>> framework/base/lib/ant-trax-1.8.0.jar
>> framework/base/lib/commons/commons-vfs-20070730.jar
>>
>> There may be other files in the same condition.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Jacopo
>>

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi Raj,

From: "Rajbir Saini" <[hidden email]>
> BTW, how to you checkout OFBiz or download the source if there is no Internet connection. I know we can build with Maven without
> Internect connection once you have downloaded the dependencies when you build first time.

A real important issue with Ivy: it would be much slower to check out the whole (I do that often, not always from ASF repo, but
clients's, etc.). And we will still need to do it for each release to package (minor).

There are other minor problems like sometimes you need to extract a temporary snapshoots from an attachment somewhere (ie you can't
find it in a repo). I have been in such a situation in the past, notably with Geronimo (actually it was WASCE 2.0.0.1
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=7045153). Ivy would get stuck in such cases. OK, this is is out of
OFBiz, but we have also snapshots or modifed version of libs (I did, or used, one for DBCP years ago).

If we find good solutions for these issues (and some others we may come with) then we should discuss it. But the slowness is a
bummer IMO.

>Also, OFBiz similar to other should have a different binary release and generally binary releases have all the dependencies
>bundled. Binary releases are for the end users and not developers.

You mean we don't have binary relases right and users still need to build? But all our dependencies are bundled, what's the problem?
I think we already discussed about binary relases. Users would still have to load data. We could also package them. But is it not
easy to simply follow the Quick start here http://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html?

Jacques

> Thanks,
>
> Raj
>
> On Thursday 12 April 2012 02:14 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> The problem with this approach: it does not work if you don't have an Internet connection: blocking
>>
>> -1
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>> From: "Pierre Smits" <[hidden email]>
>>> Hi Jacopo,
>>>
>>> How about using Apache Ivy more to manage dependencies. That way OFBiz
>>> should reduce in size dramatically and the modifications of the licence and
>>> notice file are trimmed down considerably.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Pierre
>>>
>>> Op 11 april 2012 18:49 schreef Jacopo Cappellato <
>>> [hidden email]> het volgende:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> the following are housekeeping tasks that could be part of the "SlimDown"
>>>> roadmap we could do (help from the community would be highly appreciated)
>>>> related to the big number of jar files bundled with OFBiz:
>>>>
>>>> * making sure all jar files are marked as binary
>>>> * making sure they are listed properly in LICENSE (and if required NOTICE)
>>>> file
>>>> * making sure we are running stable versions and not snapshots (whenever
>>>> possible)
>>>> * upgrade jars to use latest versions (whenever possible)
>>>> * remove jars no more needed
>>>> * rename old jars to add release numbers in the file name
>>>>
>>>> Any ideas on how to document compilation and runtime dependencies, purpose
>>>> and versions of each jars bundled in OFBiz?
>>>> A useful (but outdated/incomplete) source of information is this page:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz
>>>>
>>>> You may have noticed that in the last few days I already started the work
>>>> of upgrading some jars, setting the file properties to binary etc..
>>>>
>>>> I have also identified a few jars that may not be needed anymore, but I
>>>> would like your help/input in figuring out if we can actually remove them;
>>>> in fact, even if I was able to compile and run successfully all tests it is
>>>> still not guaranteed that some of them may be used under special conditions
>>>> at runtime (this is true for all jars):
>>>>
>>>> framework/base/lib/ant/ant-nodeps-1.8.1.jar
>>>> framework/base/lib/Tidy.jar
>>>> framework/base/lib/ant-trax-1.8.0.jar
>>>> framework/base/lib/commons/commons-vfs-20070730.jar
>>>>
>>>> There may be other files in the same condition.
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>
>>>> Jacopo
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Rajbir Saini]

Hi Jacques,

I agree there are minor problems when libraries are downloaded form
different repositories. I had been in similar situation couple of time
in the past. But again, source repository is not really to store the
binary contents. We cant main any versioning information of the jars in
the source repository.

Regarding binary release, almost every project in open source I came
across have an Ant target or Maven goal some thing like dist to create
the binary distribution. Generally, the structure of the distribution is
not same as source tree. Binary releases, re-organise the code with a
directory structure like bin, conf, lib etc. I feel this is one of the
reason we had the problem with the bin folder colliding with the Eclipse
bin folder. Bin folder suppose to exist only in the binary release and
not in the source tree.

Thanks,

Raj

On Thursday 12 April 2012 04:46 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> Hi Raj,
>
> From: "Rajbir Saini" <[hidden email]>
>> BTW, how to you checkout OFBiz or download the source if there is no
>> Internet connection. I know we can build with Maven without
>> Internect connection once you have downloaded the dependencies when
>> you build first time.
>
> A real important issue with Ivy: it would be much slower to check out
> the whole (I do that often, not always from ASF repo, but
> clients's, etc.). And we will still need to do it for each release to
> package (minor).
>
> There are other minor problems like sometimes you need to extract a
> temporary snapshoots from an attachment somewhere (ie you can't
> find it in a repo). I have been in such a situation in the past,
> notably with Geronimo (actually it was WASCE 2.0.0.1
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=7045153).
> Ivy would get stuck in such cases. OK, this is is out of
> OFBiz, but we have also snapshots or modifed version of libs (I did,
> or used, one for DBCP years ago).
>
> If we find good solutions for these issues (and some others we may
> come with) then we should discuss it. But the slowness is a
> bummer IMO.
>
>> Also, OFBiz similar to other should have a different binary release
>> and generally binary releases have all the dependencies
>> bundled. Binary releases are for the end users and not developers.
>
> You mean we don't have binary relases right and users still need to
> build? But all our dependencies are bundled, what's the problem?
> I think we already discussed about binary relases. Users would still
> have to load data. We could also package them. But is it not
> easy to simply follow the Quick start here
> http://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html?
>
> Jacques
>
>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Raj
>>
>> On Thursday 12 April 2012 02:14 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>> The problem with this approach: it does not work if you don't have
>>> an Internet connection: blocking
>>>
>>> -1
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>> From: "Pierre Smits" <[hidden email]>
>>>> Hi Jacopo,
>>>>
>>>> How about using Apache Ivy more to manage dependencies. That way OFBiz
>>>> should reduce in size dramatically and the modifications of the
>>>> licence and
>>>> notice file are trimmed down considerably.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Pierre
>>>>
>>>> Op 11 april 2012 18:49 schreef Jacopo Cappellato <
>>>> [hidden email]> het volgende:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> the following are housekeeping tasks that could be part of the
>>>>> "SlimDown"
>>>>> roadmap we could do (help from the community would be highly
>>>>> appreciated)
>>>>> related to the big number of jar files bundled with OFBiz:
>>>>>
>>>>> * making sure all jar files are marked as binary
>>>>> * making sure they are listed properly in LICENSE (and if required
>>>>> NOTICE)
>>>>> file
>>>>> * making sure we are running stable versions and not snapshots
>>>>> (whenever
>>>>> possible)
>>>>> * upgrade jars to use latest versions (whenever possible)
>>>>> * remove jars no more needed
>>>>> * rename old jars to add release numbers in the file name
>>>>>
>>>>> Any ideas on how to document compilation and runtime dependencies,
>>>>> purpose
>>>>> and versions of each jars bundled in OFBiz?
>>>>> A useful (but outdated/incomplete) source of information is this
>>>>> page:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You may have noticed that in the last few days I already started
>>>>> the work
>>>>> of upgrading some jars, setting the file properties to binary etc..
>>>>>
>>>>> I have also identified a few jars that may not be needed anymore,
>>>>> but I
>>>>> would like your help/input in figuring out if we can actually
>>>>> remove them;
>>>>> in fact, even if I was able to compile and run successfully all
>>>>> tests it is
>>>>> still not guaranteed that some of them may be used under special
>>>>> conditions
>>>>> at runtime (this is true for all jars):
>>>>>
>>>>> framework/base/lib/ant/ant-nodeps-1.8.1.jar
>>>>> framework/base/lib/Tidy.jar
>>>>> framework/base/lib/ant-trax-1.8.0.jar
>>>>> framework/base/lib/commons/commons-vfs-20070730.jar
>>>>>
>>>>> There may be other files in the same condition.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacopo
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

To be frank, when I 1st read Pierre's proposition I thought it was a good idea and just wanted to ask him for patches :p

Then I put my black hat (played the devil's advocate if you prefer) and began to think about drawbacks and possibles issues. No
Internet connection poped to my mind and then those minor issues.

I now think that the no internet connection is indeed not a deep problem. Because, like you said, you need initially to checkout
anyway.

But for the slownesss I'm less sure. I just checked and I see that Ivy does not see that it has already downloaded a lib and does it
again. Can we prevent that?

From: "Rajbir Saini" <[hidden email]>
> Hi Jacques,
>
> I agree there are minor problems when libraries are downloaded form different repositories. I had been in similar situation couple
> of time in the past. But again, source repository is not really to store the binary contents. We cant main any versioning
> information of the jars in the source repository.

You mean "we can maintain any versioning info..." ?. How do you envision that exactly?

Jacques

> Regarding binary release, almost every project in open source I came across have an Ant target or Maven goal some thing like dist
> to create the binary distribution. Generally, the structure of the distribution is not same as source tree. Binary releases,
> re-organise the code with a directory structure like bin, conf, lib etc. I feel this is one of the reason we had the problem with
> the bin folder colliding with the Eclipse bin folder. Bin folder suppose to exist only in the binary release and not in the source
> tree.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Raj
>
> On Thursday 12 April 2012 04:46 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> Hi Raj,
>>
>> From: "Rajbir Saini" <[hidden email]>
>>> BTW, how to you checkout OFBiz or download the source if there is no Internet connection. I know we can build with Maven without
>>> Internect connection once you have downloaded the dependencies when you build first time.
>>
>> A real important issue with Ivy: it would be much slower to check out the whole (I do that often, not always from ASF repo, but
>> clients's, etc.). And we will still need to do it for each release to package (minor).
>>
>> There are other minor problems like sometimes you need to extract a temporary snapshoots from an attachment somewhere (ie you
>> can't
>> find it in a repo). I have been in such a situation in the past, notably with Geronimo (actually it was WASCE 2.0.0.1
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=7045153). Ivy would get stuck in such cases. OK, this is is out
>> of
>> OFBiz, but we have also snapshots or modifed version of libs (I did, or used, one for DBCP years ago).
>>
>> If we find good solutions for these issues (and some others we may come with) then we should discuss it. But the slowness is a
>> bummer IMO.
>>
>>> Also, OFBiz similar to other should have a different binary release and generally binary releases have all the dependencies
>>> bundled. Binary releases are for the end users and not developers.
>>
>> You mean we don't have binary relases right and users still need to build? But all our dependencies are bundled, what's the
>> problem?
>> I think we already discussed about binary relases. Users would still have to load data. We could also package them. But is it not
>> easy to simply follow the Quick start here http://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html?
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Raj
>>>
>>> On Thursday 12 April 2012 02:14 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>> The problem with this approach: it does not work if you don't have an Internet connection: blocking
>>>>
>>>> -1
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>> From: "Pierre Smits" <[hidden email]>
>>>>> Hi Jacopo,
>>>>>
>>>>> How about using Apache Ivy more to manage dependencies. That way OFBiz
>>>>> should reduce in size dramatically and the modifications of the licence and
>>>>> notice file are trimmed down considerably.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Pierre
>>>>>
>>>>> Op 11 april 2012 18:49 schreef Jacopo Cappellato <
>>>>> [hidden email]> het volgende:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the following are housekeeping tasks that could be part of the "SlimDown"
>>>>>> roadmap we could do (help from the community would be highly appreciated)
>>>>>> related to the big number of jar files bundled with OFBiz:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * making sure all jar files are marked as binary
>>>>>> * making sure they are listed properly in LICENSE (and if required NOTICE)
>>>>>> file
>>>>>> * making sure we are running stable versions and not snapshots (whenever
>>>>>> possible)
>>>>>> * upgrade jars to use latest versions (whenever possible)
>>>>>> * remove jars no more needed
>>>>>> * rename old jars to add release numbers in the file name
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any ideas on how to document compilation and runtime dependencies, purpose
>>>>>> and versions of each jars bundled in OFBiz?
>>>>>> A useful (but outdated/incomplete) source of information is this page:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You may have noticed that in the last few days I already started the work
>>>>>> of upgrading some jars, setting the file properties to binary etc..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have also identified a few jars that may not be needed anymore, but I
>>>>>> would like your help/input in figuring out if we can actually remove them;
>>>>>> in fact, even if I was able to compile and run successfully all tests it is
>>>>>> still not guaranteed that some of them may be used under special conditions
>>>>>> at runtime (this is true for all jars):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> framework/base/lib/ant/ant-nodeps-1.8.1.jar
>>>>>> framework/base/lib/Tidy.jar
>>>>>> framework/base/lib/ant-trax-1.8.0.jar
>>>>>> framework/base/lib/commons/commons-vfs-20070730.jar
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There may be other files in the same condition.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacopo
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Erwan de FERRIERES-2]

2012/4/12 Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]>:

> To be frank, when I 1st read Pierre's proposition I thought it was a good
> idea and just wanted to ask him for patches :p
>
> Then I put my black hat (played the devil's advocate if you prefer) and
> began to think about drawbacks and possibles issues. No Internet connection
> poped to my mind and then those minor issues.
>
> I now think that the no internet connection is indeed not a deep problem.
> Because, like you said, you need initially to checkout
> anyway.
>
> But for the slownesss I'm less sure. I just checked and I see that Ivy does
> not see that it has already downloaded a lib and does it again. Can we
> prevent that?

wrong, it checks in the .ivy folder.
If you look at the log, and the jar is already downloaded, it will
tell you downloaded 0 / copied 1 (or something like that).

--
Erwan de FERRIERES

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

Well, I think it is important to bundle all the jars required to build, run and test the system in the OFBiz package; and they have to be properly listed in LICENSE/NOTICE files.
See in particular:

http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain

Jacopo

On Apr 12, 2012, at 3:52 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> To be frank, when I 1st read Pierre's proposition I thought it was a good idea and just wanted to ask him for patches :p
>
> Then I put my black hat (played the devil's advocate if you prefer) and began to think about drawbacks and possibles issues. No Internet connection poped to my mind and then those minor issues.
>
> I now think that the no internet connection is indeed not a deep problem. Because, like you said, you need initially to checkout
> anyway.
>
> But for the slownesss I'm less sure. I just checked and I see that Ivy does not see that it has already downloaded a lib and does it again. Can we prevent that?
>
> From: "Rajbir Saini" <[hidden email]>
>> Hi Jacques,
>>
>> I agree there are minor problems when libraries are downloaded form different repositories. I had been in similar situation couple
>> of time in the past. But again, source repository is not really to store the binary contents. We cant main any versioning
>> information of the jars in the source repository.
>
> You mean "we can maintain any versioning info..." ?. How do you envision that exactly?
>
> Jacques
>
>> Regarding binary release, almost every project in open source I came across have an Ant target or Maven goal some thing like dist
>> to create the binary distribution. Generally, the structure of the distribution is not same as source tree. Binary releases,
>> re-organise the code with a directory structure like bin, conf, lib etc. I feel this is one of the reason we had the problem with
>> the bin folder colliding with the Eclipse bin folder. Bin folder suppose to exist only in the binary release and not in the source
>> tree.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Raj
>>
>> On Thursday 12 April 2012 04:46 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>> Hi Raj,
>>>
>>> From: "Rajbir Saini" <[hidden email]>
>>>> BTW, how to you checkout OFBiz or download the source if there is no Internet connection. I know we can build with Maven without
>>>> Internect connection once you have downloaded the dependencies when you build first time.
>>>
>>> A real important issue with Ivy: it would be much slower to check out the whole (I do that often, not always from ASF repo, but
>>> clients's, etc.). And we will still need to do it for each release to package (minor).
>>>
>>> There are other minor problems like sometimes you need to extract a temporary snapshoots from an attachment somewhere (ie you
>>> can't
>>> find it in a repo). I have been in such a situation in the past, notably with Geronimo (actually it was WASCE 2.0.0.1
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=7045153). Ivy would get stuck in such cases. OK, this is is out
>>> of
>>> OFBiz, but we have also snapshots or modifed version of libs (I did, or used, one for DBCP years ago).
>>>
>>> If we find good solutions for these issues (and some others we may come with) then we should discuss it. But the slowness is a
>>> bummer IMO.
>>>
>>>> Also, OFBiz similar to other should have a different binary release and generally binary releases have all the dependencies
>>>> bundled. Binary releases are for the end users and not developers.
>>>
>>> You mean we don't have binary relases right and users still need to build? But all our dependencies are bundled, what's the
>>> problem?
>>> I think we already discussed about binary relases. Users would still have to load data. We could also package them. But is it not
>>> easy to simply follow the Quick start here http://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html?
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Raj
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday 12 April 2012 02:14 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>> The problem with this approach: it does not work if you don't have an Internet connection: blocking
>>>>>
>>>>> -1
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>
>>>>> From: "Pierre Smits" <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> Hi Jacopo,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How about using Apache Ivy more to manage dependencies. That way OFBiz
>>>>>> should reduce in size dramatically and the modifications of the licence and
>>>>>> notice file are trimmed down considerably.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pierre
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Op 11 april 2012 18:49 schreef Jacopo Cappellato <
>>>>>> [hidden email]> het volgende:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the following are housekeeping tasks that could be part of the "SlimDown"
>>>>>>> roadmap we could do (help from the community would be highly appreciated)
>>>>>>> related to the big number of jar files bundled with OFBiz:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * making sure all jar files are marked as binary
>>>>>>> * making sure they are listed properly in LICENSE (and if required NOTICE)
>>>>>>> file
>>>>>>> * making sure we are running stable versions and not snapshots (whenever
>>>>>>> possible)
>>>>>>> * upgrade jars to use latest versions (whenever possible)
>>>>>>> * remove jars no more needed
>>>>>>> * rename old jars to add release numbers in the file name
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Any ideas on how to document compilation and runtime dependencies, purpose
>>>>>>> and versions of each jars bundled in OFBiz?
>>>>>>> A useful (but outdated/incomplete) source of information is this page:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You may have noticed that in the last few days I already started the work
>>>>>>> of upgrading some jars, setting the file properties to binary etc..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have also identified a few jars that may not be needed anymore, but I
>>>>>>> would like your help/input in figuring out if we can actually remove them;
>>>>>>> in fact, even if I was able to compile and run successfully all tests it is
>>>>>>> still not guaranteed that some of them may be used under special conditions
>>>>>>> at runtime (this is true for all jars):
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> framework/base/lib/ant/ant-nodeps-1.8.1.jar
>>>>>>> framework/base/lib/Tidy.jar
>>>>>>> framework/base/lib/ant-trax-1.8.0.jar
>>>>>>> framework/base/lib/commons/commons-vfs-20070730.jar
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There may be other files in the same condition.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jacopo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>

[Jacques Le Roux]

Thanks Erwan,

That was not clear to me.

So then maybe we could discuss Pierre's proposition. But to have a real idea of the time added (not an estimate) if we use Ivy
instead of having the libs in the repo, we need to have all done already...

Jacques

From: "Erwan de FERRIERES" <[hidden email]>

> 2012/4/12 Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]>:
>> To be frank, when I 1st read Pierre's proposition I thought it was a good
>> idea and just wanted to ask him for patches :p
>>
>> Then I put my black hat (played the devil's advocate if you prefer) and
>> began to think about drawbacks and possibles issues. No Internet connection
>> poped to my mind and then those minor issues.
>>
>> I now think that the no internet connection is indeed not a deep problem.
>> Because, like you said, you need initially to checkout
>> anyway.
>>
>> But for the slownesss I'm less sure. I just checked and I see that Ivy does
>> not see that it has already downloaded a lib and does it again. Can we
>> prevent that?
>
> wrong, it checks in the .ivy folder.
> If you look at the log, and the jar is already downloaded, it will
> tell you downloaded 0 / copied 1 (or something like that).
>
> --
> Erwan de FERRIERES

[Rajbir Saini]

I agree with you Jacopo regarding bundling the jars in release.  But
source code is not release. Apache projects using Maven do not keep jars
in the repository but they do bundle the jars in release.

Thanks,

Raj

On Thursday 12 April 2012 07:38 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:

> Well, I think it is important to bundle all the jars required to build, run and test the system in the OFBiz package; and they have to be properly listed in LICENSE/NOTICE files.
> See in particular:
>
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain
>
> Jacopo
>
> On Apr 12, 2012, at 3:52 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>
>> To be frank, when I 1st read Pierre's proposition I thought it was a good idea and just wanted to ask him for patches :p
>>
>> Then I put my black hat (played the devil's advocate if you prefer) and began to think about drawbacks and possibles issues. No Internet connection poped to my mind and then those minor issues.
>>
>> I now think that the no internet connection is indeed not a deep problem. Because, like you said, you need initially to checkout
>> anyway.
>>
>> But for the slownesss I'm less sure. I just checked and I see that Ivy does not see that it has already downloaded a lib and does it again. Can we prevent that?
>>
>> From: "Rajbir Saini"<[hidden email]>
>>> Hi Jacques,
>>>
>>> I agree there are minor problems when libraries are downloaded form different repositories. I had been in similar situation couple
>>> of time in the past. But again, source repository is not really to store the binary contents. We cant main any versioning
>>> information of the jars in the source repository.
>> You mean "we can maintain any versioning info..." ?. How do you envision that exactly?
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>> Regarding binary release, almost every project in open source I came across have an Ant target or Maven goal some thing like dist
>>> to create the binary distribution. Generally, the structure of the distribution is not same as source tree. Binary releases,
>>> re-organise the code with a directory structure like bin, conf, lib etc. I feel this is one of the reason we had the problem with
>>> the bin folder colliding with the Eclipse bin folder. Bin folder suppose to exist only in the binary release and not in the source
>>> tree.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Raj
>>>
>>> On Thursday 12 April 2012 04:46 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>> Hi Raj,
>>>>
>>>> From: "Rajbir Saini"<[hidden email]>
>>>>> BTW, how to you checkout OFBiz or download the source if there is no Internet connection. I know we can build with Maven without
>>>>> Internect connection once you have downloaded the dependencies when you build first time.
>>>> A real important issue with Ivy: it would be much slower to check out the whole (I do that often, not always from ASF repo, but
>>>> clients's, etc.). And we will still need to do it for each release to package (minor).
>>>>
>>>> There are other minor problems like sometimes you need to extract a temporary snapshoots from an attachment somewhere (ie you
>>>> can't
>>>> find it in a repo). I have been in such a situation in the past, notably with Geronimo (actually it was WASCE 2.0.0.1
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=7045153). Ivy would get stuck in such cases. OK, this is is out
>>>> of
>>>> OFBiz, but we have also snapshots or modifed version of libs (I did, or used, one for DBCP years ago).
>>>>
>>>> If we find good solutions for these issues (and some others we may come with) then we should discuss it. But the slowness is a
>>>> bummer IMO.
>>>>
>>>>> Also, OFBiz similar to other should have a different binary release and generally binary releases have all the dependencies
>>>>> bundled. Binary releases are for the end users and not developers.
>>>> You mean we don't have binary relases right and users still need to build? But all our dependencies are bundled, what's the
>>>> problem?
>>>> I think we already discussed about binary relases. Users would still have to load data. We could also package them. But is it not
>>>> easy to simply follow the Quick start here http://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html?
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Raj
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thursday 12 April 2012 02:14 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>> The problem with this approach: it does not work if you don't have an Internet connection: blocking
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: "Pierre Smits"<[hidden email]>
>>>>>>> Hi Jacopo,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How about using Apache Ivy more to manage dependencies. That way OFBiz
>>>>>>> should reduce in size dramatically and the modifications of the licence and
>>>>>>> notice file are trimmed down considerably.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pierre
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Op 11 april 2012 18:49 schreef Jacopo Cappellato<
>>>>>>> [hidden email]>  het volgende:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> the following are housekeeping tasks that could be part of the "SlimDown"
>>>>>>>> roadmap we could do (help from the community would be highly appreciated)
>>>>>>>> related to the big number of jar files bundled with OFBiz:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * making sure all jar files are marked as binary
>>>>>>>> * making sure they are listed properly in LICENSE (and if required NOTICE)
>>>>>>>> file
>>>>>>>> * making sure we are running stable versions and not snapshots (whenever
>>>>>>>> possible)
>>>>>>>> * upgrade jars to use latest versions (whenever possible)
>>>>>>>> * remove jars no more needed
>>>>>>>> * rename old jars to add release numbers in the file name
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Any ideas on how to document compilation and runtime dependencies, purpose
>>>>>>>> and versions of each jars bundled in OFBiz?
>>>>>>>> A useful (but outdated/incomplete) source of information is this page:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You may have noticed that in the last few days I already started the work
>>>>>>>> of upgrading some jars, setting the file properties to binary etc..
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have also identified a few jars that may not be needed anymore, but I
>>>>>>>> would like your help/input in figuring out if we can actually remove them;
>>>>>>>> in fact, even if I was able to compile and run successfully all tests it is
>>>>>>>> still not guaranteed that some of them may be used under special conditions
>>>>>>>> at runtime (this is true for all jars):
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> framework/base/lib/ant/ant-nodeps-1.8.1.jar
>>>>>>>> framework/base/lib/Tidy.jar
>>>>>>>> framework/base/lib/ant-trax-1.8.0.jar
>>>>>>>> framework/base/lib/commons/commons-vfs-20070730.jar
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There may be other files in the same condition.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jacopo
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

I see what you mean but... source code releases are required by the ASF.

Quoting http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html :

"All releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make changes to the software being released. In some cases, binary/bytecode packages are also produced as a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools to build a compiled version of the source. In all such cases, the binary/bytecode package must have the same version number as the source release and may only add binary/bytecode files that are the result of compiling that version of the source code release."

For simplicity, the OFBiz community releases only "source code" releases; in addition (not in substitution) to them,we could also vote/approve/distribute "binary releases" but this would add a lot of work (and the packages would be rather big) and for now I don't see the need for this.
Of course, and maybe it is what you are suggesting, we could remove all jars from the svn repository and then create a release package bundling the source code with all the jars required (and this could be automated with Maven or Ivy): all this without changing our release strategy.
My main questions are: what is the real advantage of doing this? How this would solve the problems I posted at the beginning of this thread (that has been ignored to discuss about tools)?

Jacopo

On Apr 12, 2012, at 4:20 PM, Rajbir Saini wrote:

> I agree with you Jacopo regarding bundling the jars in release.  But source code is not release. Apache projects using Maven do not keep jars in the repository but they do bundle the jars in release.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Raj
>
> On Thursday 12 April 2012 07:38 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>> Well, I think it is important to bundle all the jars required to build, run and test the system in the OFBiz package; and they have to be properly listed in LICENSE/NOTICE files.
>> See in particular:
>>
>> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
>> On Apr 12, 2012, at 3:52 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>
>>> To be frank, when I 1st read Pierre's proposition I thought it was a good idea and just wanted to ask him for patches :p
>>>
>>> Then I put my black hat (played the devil's advocate if you prefer) and began to think about drawbacks and possibles issues. No Internet connection poped to my mind and then those minor issues.
>>>
>>> I now think that the no internet connection is indeed not a deep problem. Because, like you said, you need initially to checkout
>>> anyway.
>>>
>>> But for the slownesss I'm less sure. I just checked and I see that Ivy does not see that it has already downloaded a lib and does it again. Can we prevent that?
>>>
>>> From: "Rajbir Saini"<[hidden email]>
>>>> Hi Jacques,
>>>>
>>>> I agree there are minor problems when libraries are downloaded form different repositories. I had been in similar situation couple
>>>> of time in the past. But again, source repository is not really to store the binary contents. We cant main any versioning
>>>> information of the jars in the source repository.
>>> You mean "we can maintain any versioning info..." ?. How do you envision that exactly?
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>>> Regarding binary release, almost every project in open source I came across have an Ant target or Maven goal some thing like dist
>>>> to create the binary distribution. Generally, the structure of the distribution is not same as source tree. Binary releases,
>>>> re-organise the code with a directory structure like bin, conf, lib etc. I feel this is one of the reason we had the problem with
>>>> the bin folder colliding with the Eclipse bin folder. Bin folder suppose to exist only in the binary release and not in the source
>>>> tree.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Raj
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday 12 April 2012 04:46 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>> Hi Raj,
>>>>>
>>>>> From: "Rajbir Saini"<[hidden email]>
>>>>>> BTW, how to you checkout OFBiz or download the source if there is no Internet connection. I know we can build with Maven without
>>>>>> Internect connection once you have downloaded the dependencies when you build first time.
>>>>> A real important issue with Ivy: it would be much slower to check out the whole (I do that often, not always from ASF repo, but
>>>>> clients's, etc.). And we will still need to do it for each release to package (minor).
>>>>>
>>>>> There are other minor problems like sometimes you need to extract a temporary snapshoots from an attachment somewhere (ie you
>>>>> can't
>>>>> find it in a repo). I have been in such a situation in the past, notably with Geronimo (actually it was WASCE 2.0.0.1
>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=7045153). Ivy would get stuck in such cases. OK, this is is out
>>>>> of
>>>>> OFBiz, but we have also snapshots or modifed version of libs (I did, or used, one for DBCP years ago).
>>>>>
>>>>> If we find good solutions for these issues (and some others we may come with) then we should discuss it. But the slowness is a
>>>>> bummer IMO.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, OFBiz similar to other should have a different binary release and generally binary releases have all the dependencies
>>>>>> bundled. Binary releases are for the end users and not developers.
>>>>> You mean we don't have binary relases right and users still need to build? But all our dependencies are bundled, what's the
>>>>> problem?
>>>>> I think we already discussed about binary relases. Users would still have to load data. We could also package them. But is it not
>>>>> easy to simply follow the Quick start here http://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html?
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Raj
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thursday 12 April 2012 02:14 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>> The problem with this approach: it does not work if you don't have an Internet connection: blocking
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From: "Pierre Smits"<[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>> Hi Jacopo,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How about using Apache Ivy more to manage dependencies. That way OFBiz
>>>>>>>> should reduce in size dramatically and the modifications of the licence and
>>>>>>>> notice file are trimmed down considerably.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pierre
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Op 11 april 2012 18:49 schreef Jacopo Cappellato<
>>>>>>>> [hidden email]>  het volgende:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> the following are housekeeping tasks that could be part of the "SlimDown"
>>>>>>>>> roadmap we could do (help from the community would be highly appreciated)
>>>>>>>>> related to the big number of jar files bundled with OFBiz:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> * making sure all jar files are marked as binary
>>>>>>>>> * making sure they are listed properly in LICENSE (and if required NOTICE)
>>>>>>>>> file
>>>>>>>>> * making sure we are running stable versions and not snapshots (whenever
>>>>>>>>> possible)
>>>>>>>>> * upgrade jars to use latest versions (whenever possible)
>>>>>>>>> * remove jars no more needed
>>>>>>>>> * rename old jars to add release numbers in the file name
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Any ideas on how to document compilation and runtime dependencies, purpose
>>>>>>>>> and versions of each jars bundled in OFBiz?
>>>>>>>>> A useful (but outdated/incomplete) source of information is this page:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You may have noticed that in the last few days I already started the work
>>>>>>>>> of upgrading some jars, setting the file properties to binary etc..
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have also identified a few jars that may not be needed anymore, but I
>>>>>>>>> would like your help/input in figuring out if we can actually remove them;
>>>>>>>>> in fact, even if I was able to compile and run successfully all tests it is
>>>>>>>>> still not guaranteed that some of them may be used under special conditions
>>>>>>>>> at runtime (this is true for all jars):
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> framework/base/lib/ant/ant-nodeps-1.8.1.jar
>>>>>>>>> framework/base/lib/Tidy.jar
>>>>>>>>> framework/base/lib/ant-trax-1.8.0.jar
>>>>>>>>> framework/base/lib/commons/commons-vfs-20070730.jar
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There may be other files in the same condition.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jacopo
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>
>

[Erwan de FERRIERES-2]

../..

> My main questions are: what is the real advantage of doing this? How this would solve the problems I posted at the beginning of this thread (that has been ignored to discuss about tools)?

ivy would rename the jars the way we want (eg package-version.jar),
and using ivy, we would then reduce the LICENSE file, as less jars
would be released with OFBiz. From an extremist POV, we could only
whip ant + ivy, and one of the first task would be to download
everything.


../..
--
Erwan de FERRIERES

[Jacques Le Roux]

Yes, I was only dicussing about trunk checkout. As proposed Raj a specific ant task could be used to prepare the releases.
Anyway more a brainstorming than anything else at this stage

Jacques

From: "Jacopo Cappellato" <[hidden email]>

> Well, I think it is important to bundle all the jars required to build, run and test the system in the OFBiz package; and they
> have to be properly listed in LICENSE/NOTICE files.
> See in particular:
>
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain
>
> Jacopo
>
> On Apr 12, 2012, at 3:52 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>
>> To be frank, when I 1st read Pierre's proposition I thought it was a good idea and just wanted to ask him for patches :p
>>
>> Then I put my black hat (played the devil's advocate if you prefer) and began to think about drawbacks and possibles issues. No
>> Internet connection poped to my mind and then those minor issues.
>>
>> I now think that the no internet connection is indeed not a deep problem. Because, like you said, you need initially to checkout
>> anyway.
>>
>> But for the slownesss I'm less sure. I just checked and I see that Ivy does not see that it has already downloaded a lib and does
>> it again. Can we prevent that?
>>
>> From: "Rajbir Saini" <[hidden email]>
>>> Hi Jacques,
>>>
>>> I agree there are minor problems when libraries are downloaded form different repositories. I had been in similar situation
>>> couple
>>> of time in the past. But again, source repository is not really to store the binary contents. We cant main any versioning
>>> information of the jars in the source repository.
>>
>> You mean "we can maintain any versioning info..." ?. How do you envision that exactly?
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>> Regarding binary release, almost every project in open source I came across have an Ant target or Maven goal some thing like
>>> dist
>>> to create the binary distribution. Generally, the structure of the distribution is not same as source tree. Binary releases,
>>> re-organise the code with a directory structure like bin, conf, lib etc. I feel this is one of the reason we had the problem
>>> with
>>> the bin folder colliding with the Eclipse bin folder. Bin folder suppose to exist only in the binary release and not in the
>>> source
>>> tree.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Raj
>>>
>>> On Thursday 12 April 2012 04:46 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>> Hi Raj,
>>>>
>>>> From: "Rajbir Saini" <[hidden email]>
>>>>> BTW, how to you checkout OFBiz or download the source if there is no Internet connection. I know we can build with Maven
>>>>> without
>>>>> Internect connection once you have downloaded the dependencies when you build first time.
>>>>
>>>> A real important issue with Ivy: it would be much slower to check out the whole (I do that often, not always from ASF repo, but
>>>> clients's, etc.). And we will still need to do it for each release to package (minor).
>>>>
>>>> There are other minor problems like sometimes you need to extract a temporary snapshoots from an attachment somewhere (ie you
>>>> can't
>>>> find it in a repo). I have been in such a situation in the past, notably with Geronimo (actually it was WASCE 2.0.0.1
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=7045153). Ivy would get stuck in such cases. OK, this is is
>>>> out
>>>> of
>>>> OFBiz, but we have also snapshots or modifed version of libs (I did, or used, one for DBCP years ago).
>>>>
>>>> If we find good solutions for these issues (and some others we may come with) then we should discuss it. But the slowness is a
>>>> bummer IMO.
>>>>
>>>>> Also, OFBiz similar to other should have a different binary release and generally binary releases have all the dependencies
>>>>> bundled. Binary releases are for the end users and not developers.
>>>>
>>>> You mean we don't have binary relases right and users still need to build? But all our dependencies are bundled, what's the
>>>> problem?
>>>> I think we already discussed about binary relases. Users would still have to load data. We could also package them. But is it
>>>> not
>>>> easy to simply follow the Quick start here http://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html?
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Raj
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thursday 12 April 2012 02:14 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>> The problem with this approach: it does not work if you don't have an Internet connection: blocking
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: "Pierre Smits" <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>> Hi Jacopo,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How about using Apache Ivy more to manage dependencies. That way OFBiz
>>>>>>> should reduce in size dramatically and the modifications of the licence and
>>>>>>> notice file are trimmed down considerably.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pierre
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Op 11 april 2012 18:49 schreef Jacopo Cappellato <
>>>>>>> [hidden email]> het volgende:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> the following are housekeeping tasks that could be part of the "SlimDown"
>>>>>>>> roadmap we could do (help from the community would be highly appreciated)
>>>>>>>> related to the big number of jar files bundled with OFBiz:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * making sure all jar files are marked as binary
>>>>>>>> * making sure they are listed properly in LICENSE (and if required NOTICE)
>>>>>>>> file
>>>>>>>> * making sure we are running stable versions and not snapshots (whenever
>>>>>>>> possible)
>>>>>>>> * upgrade jars to use latest versions (whenever possible)
>>>>>>>> * remove jars no more needed
>>>>>>>> * rename old jars to add release numbers in the file name
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Any ideas on how to document compilation and runtime dependencies, purpose
>>>>>>>> and versions of each jars bundled in OFBiz?
>>>>>>>> A useful (but outdated/incomplete) source of information is this page:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You may have noticed that in the last few days I already started the work
>>>>>>>> of upgrading some jars, setting the file properties to binary etc..
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have also identified a few jars that may not be needed anymore, but I
>>>>>>>> would like your help/input in figuring out if we can actually remove them;
>>>>>>>> in fact, even if I was able to compile and run successfully all tests it is
>>>>>>>> still not guaranteed that some of them may be used under special conditions
>>>>>>>> at runtime (this is true for all jars):
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> framework/base/lib/ant/ant-nodeps-1.8.1.jar
>>>>>>>> framework/base/lib/Tidy.jar
>>>>>>>> framework/base/lib/ant-trax-1.8.0.jar
>>>>>>>> framework/base/lib/commons/commons-vfs-20070730.jar
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There may be other files in the same condition.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jacopo
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
>

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

On Apr 12, 2012, at 4:37 PM, Erwan de FERRIERES wrote:

> ivy would rename the jars the way we want (eg package-version.jar),
> and using ivy, we would then reduce the LICENSE file, as less jars
> would be released with OFBiz. From an extremist POV, we could only
> whip ant + ivy, and one of the first task would be to download
> everything.

No no, this is not possible: please ready my previous message carefully; the release package will have to contain required jars (while the svn may not) and most of all the LICENSE file must contain all jars that are required to run/test/use the software.

Jacopo