Re: [Springframework-developer] 1.0 M3 prepared

[Colin S. <col...@ex...>]

jürgen höller [werk3AT] wrote:

>FYI, I've already committed the renaming from ListableBeanFactoryImpl to DefaultListableBeanFactory. The web MVC exception stuff will follow tomorrow.
> 
>I've also reworked the Tiles example, using org.springframework.samples.tiles as package now, and auto-detecting the Tiles DTD. The FileNameViewController has now moved to org.springframework.web.servlet.mvc. And I've changed my mind: I do like to include struts-1.1.jar and commons-digester.jar now, for an out-of-the-box working example. It already annoys me having to copy those files in for testing, so consider a new user...
> 
>I've just modified our build script to generate two release zips: spring-framework-1.0-m3.zip (~5600 KB) and spring-framework-1.0-m3-samples.zip (~5400 KB). Both use spring-framework-1.0-m3 as path in the zip, for convenient extraction to the same location. The former contains dist, docs, lib/aop-alliance, lib/jakarta-commons/commons-logging.jar, src, and the readmes, while the latter contains samples and the additional libs necessary for building and running them.
> 
>What do you think? Should I commit the changed build script and use it for the M3 release? I believe it would make sense to split the release into those two files, as 11 MB is already a bit large for a single distribution.
> 
>Juergen
>  
>
It probably makes sense to split things up this way. If somebody doesn't 
care about the libs for the samples it's a drag to pull them down each 
release. Maybe it would make sense though to still include _sources_ for 
the samples even with the first jar. Sample sources sometimes help you 
figure stuff out that is not really related. I know that when I was 
initially looking at Spring and figuring out Application Contexts, I 
looked at all the contexts in all the samples, even if I had no interest 
at that time in actually building those samples or using those parts of 
Spring (like the MVC).

Colin