Community
Participate
Working Groups
Build ID: N/A Steps To Reproduce: There are a lot of common libraries that I love to pick up from orbit, before I package them myself. I find that quite some packages are missing their sources. This makes it difficult to debug these packages, and the only other alternative is to download the sources from the original distributor's archives or svn. More information:
in general we try to include the source so if it is missing it is either a mistake or for some reason. please point out the ones that you think are in error.
I'm particularly interested in org.apache.log4j. However there are quite a few that are missing sources, a simple sed script provided me this list from http://download.eclipse.org/tools/orbit/downloads/drops/R20080611105805/: com.jcraft.jsch 0.1.28 2200 DJ Houghton com.jcraft.jsch 0.1.31 2203 DJ Houghton javax.activation 1.1.0 2248 David Williams javax.jws 2.0.0 1709 Oisin Hurley javax.mail 1.4.0 2247 David Williams javax.management 1.2.0 2197 DJ Houghton javax.management.remote 1.0.0 2197 DJ Houghton javax.wsdl 1.4.0 2090 David Williams javax.wsdl 1.5.1 2091 David Williams javax.wsdl15 1.5.1 2091 David Williams javax.xml 1.3.4 2166 David Williams javax.xml.rpc 1.1.0 2172 David Williams javax.xml.soap 1.2.0 2089 David Williams javax.xml.ws 2.0.0 1711 Oisin Hurley net.sourceforge.mx4j 3.0.1 2197 DJ Houghton net.sourceforge.mx4j.remote 3.0.1 2197 DJ Houghton org.apache.axis 1.4.0 2087 David Williams org.apache.batik.pdf 1.6.0 2141 Joel Cayne org.apache.commons.discovery 0.2.0 2173 David Williams org.apache.log4j 1.2.13 2168 David Williams org.apache.log4j 1.2.8 2167 David Williams org.apache.ws.commons.util 1.0.0 2357 DJ Houghton org.apache.ws.jaxme 0.5.1 2195 DJ Houghton org.apache.wsil4j 1.0.0 2090 David Williams org.apache.xalan 2.7.0 1910 David Williams org.apache.xalan 2.7.1 2213 David Williams org.apache.xerces 2.8.0 2093 David Williams org.apache.xerces 2.9.0 2095 David Williams org.apache.xml.resolver 1.1.0 2151 David Williams org.apache.xml.resolver 1.2.0 2136 David Williams org.apache.xml.serializer 2.7.1 2134 David Williams org.apache.xmlrpc 3.0.0 2196 DJ Houghton org.mozilla.javascript 1.6.2 1628 David Williams org.mozilla.javascript 1.6.6 2175 David Williams org.sat4j.core 2.0.0 2350 Pascal Rapicault org.sat4j.pb 2.0.0 2350 Pascal Rapicault org.uddi4j 2.0.5 2169 David Williams
For com.jcraft.jsch, the latest version in Orbit (0.1.37) does have sources. I don't think it's worth the time adding sources to the older (Callisto, Europa) versions. Perhaps some other bundles are in a similar situation. Ketan, if you script could also find out for each bundle what other versions are in Orbit (just aggregate all the bundles by version), it might be helpful to see if any "missing source" issue is really worth looking at.
For the record, the ones with my name associated, were intentional, just as a cost saving method. While it would be "nice to have", for the most part our projects immediate use of most of these packages is not deep nor direct so we just needed the executable code there. It is low on my to-do list to add the source for some of these, that is, is not a high priority for me or my project, so if someone wants to contribute the source please do. Otherwise, suspect I'll get to it someday. So, it's nice to hear people express their needs and priorities. The mechanics around attaching source has been made easier over the years and has seemed to settle down, so should be less work now -- thanks to all who have made those efforts! (DJ and others?) [Also note, the CQ's associated with the use of these third party packages aare supposed to specify if source is also distributed ... I'm not aware of any restrictions ... but, as people add source, they should be sure the CQ covers it.]
I'm going to mark this particular bug as "won't fix" but it doesn't mean I'm not sympathetic ... it's just that I don't think there will be any mass effort to add source to bundles that don't already have it. If someone wants to contribute them ... as patches ... then I'd suggest opening up specific bugs with patches for specific bundles. Note, however, in some cases the "third party CQ" might specify only "binary distribution". If we also distribute the source, the CQ must say "source and binary distribution" and I think the legal staff do some extra vetting in those cases (though not sure, maybe it's just record keeping). Point is, before anyone could contribute (or apply) a source patch, the CQ should be checked.
agreed though it might be good as a pre-Galileo effort to have a push to include source where source is available.
