lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Vesse <rve...@dotnetrdf.org>
Subject Re: Nuget packages & 3rd party libs
Date Tue, 06 Jan 2015 17:16:49 GMT
Note that there is nothing stopping anyone packaging up an arbitrary DLL
into a NuGet package and publishing it themselves if that is what is
necessary to get an all NuGet build.  I've done this myself in the past
for some of the more obscure dependencies I've needed in projects.

However if you are using a dependency that isn't on NuGet these days that
probably begs the question about whether said dependency is abandon ware
and should be removed/replaced

Rob

On 06/01/2015 16:26, "Wyatt Barnett" <wyatt.barnett@gmail.com> wrote:

>I'm one of those who disagrees -- at least at this scale. We have very,
>relatively small few dependencies here that are quite stable. They have
>been in the git repo at some point so we are already paying freight.
>
>Personally I'd prefer the safer route of having the binaries locally and
>not depending on nuget being up and nuget keeping whatever old
>dependencies
>we might have avaliable -- there is no SLA there that I'm aware of on that
>side of the world and I'm not sure what recourse we would have if there
>were.
>
>That said it does appear nuget restore has been working well so I don't
>see
>why we can't proceed down this path.
>
>On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Paul Irwin <pirwin@feature23.com> wrote:
>
>> There are those in the community that disagree with that approach
>>though,
>> so it isn't obvious to some. Just trying to clarify and determine if
>>that
>> is our project's stance.
>>
>>
>> Paul Irwin
>> Lead Software Engineer
>> feature[23]
>>
>> Email: pirwin@feature23.com
>> Cell: 863-698-9294
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 11:15 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <itamar@code972.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Obviously
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > Itamar Syn-Hershko
>> > http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko>
>> > Freelance Developer & Consultant
>> > Author of RavenDB in Action <http://manning.com/synhershko/>
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:11 PM, Paul Irwin <pirwin@feature23.com>
>>wrote:
>> >
>> > > Agreed with using Nuget as much as possible. I also prefer not to
>> commit
>> > > binaries (like the packages folder) into the repo to reduce bloat.
>>Yes,
>> > it
>> > > requires internet access to pull down the latest packages, but that
>> beats
>> > > having a gigantic repo to clone.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Paul Irwin
>> > > Lead Software Engineer
>> > > feature[23]
>> > >
>> > > Email: pirwin@feature23.com
>> > > Cell: 863-698-9294
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 8:58 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko
>><itamar@code972.com
>> >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > No, on the master branch we will be using nuget as much as we
>>can. If
>> > you
>> > > > can bring Antlr with nuget please do so.
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > >
>> > > > Itamar Syn-Hershko
>> > > > http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko>
>> > > > Freelance Developer & Consultant
>> > > > Author of RavenDB in Action <http://manning.com/synhershko/>
>> > > >
>> > > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 3:49 PM, Hakeem Mohammed <
>> hakeemosrc@gmail.com>
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > So all 3rd party dlls go under a subfolder under lib and actual
>> nuget
>> > > > pkgs
>> > > > > are not used. Is that correct?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Apologies if this has been addressed before, I'm new to the
>>group
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Thanks!
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>





Mime
View raw message