-------- Forwarded Message --------
I’m waiting to
hear back to confirm, but I’m pretty sure the gist of it is
that we can’t exclude unnecessary embedded dependencies
(netcdf, fits, slf4-*, etc.) from the CQ if we are the not
the ones distributing the dependency in question.
If we
distribute HDF-Java but still leave it to the user to
install native HDF5, that might be okay. The prebuilt HDF5
has 2 embedded dependencies, but I think submitting CQs for
them should be fairly straight forward as they don’t seem to
have any further dependencies.
I’ll let you
know when I hear back if this is the case for certain.
Anna
Anna,
How would it make it easier exactly? Does it make the CQ
easier? It definitely doesn't make the IT easier on our
side.
If it streamlines the CQ, we can distribute them. The
problem is that you and Jordan will have to get everything
built and working with ICE on Windows, Mac and Linux in that
case.
I originally figured that we would distribute HDF-Java but
leave the HDF5 C/C++ libraries to them. Again, whatever
strategy works best is fine by me.
Jay
On 11/20/2014 03:51 PM, Wojtowicz, Anna wrote:
Jay,
Are we wanting to actually distribute the
binary HDF5 and HDF-Java libraries (the DLLs/SOs installed
locally) as part of ICE? I’ve been talking to the Eclipse IP
folks for a few days now trying to discern how to handle
HDF5 and HDF-Java if we’re not the ones distributing the
libraries, but if we are, that makes this all a lot simpler…
Anna
--
Jay Jay Billings
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Telephone: (865) 272-9420
Email:billingsjj@xxxxxxxx
Twitter Handle: @jayjaybillings