On Dec 11, 2006, at 5:39 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
In several cases, you must release more than one spec at a time.
But my point was more general... as in general its easier to
manage releases for a set of modules together instead of one by one.
You are assuming that is makes since to release a set of specs at
once. Normally only one spec changes at a time (due to a bug),
then there is no reason to create a big set of every single spec
jar we have ever created just to release a single jar.
If that spec has not dependencies on other specs, sure... but there
are some which are dependent, and in those cases you must handle them
too... and I am telling you now that people will miss them and screw
up the release, cause a bunch more work, and IMO a lot more confusion
or even build related issues if the fixed release is the same version.
Also, if you consider hooking up this process to a build
automation tool, so that each build gets released by that tool,
then the specs project effectively needs to get split up into a
project per-module, which is a bunch of unneeded overhead.
Only the specs being worked on would need build automation, and
event then I would suggest G never uses SNAPSHOT specs. Instead
when the specs are mostly complete we release a M1 and when they
are finished we release 1.0. In that case no automation is
necessary.
It is still much easier to just setup one project for all of the
specs rather than add/remove projects as needed.
* * *
If you folks really want to version spec modules independently,
then I suggest you also consider versioning server modules
independently.
I certainly don't recommend doing either, but IMO they are both
the same problem from a build perspective, just with slightly
different context.
I think you are using a lame rhetoric technique to make your
point. You are saying if you want to do X, then you should
certainly do Y, and since no one would ever want to do Y, then we
should never do X.
Fine, whatever dude... I was using a lame technique you used earlier
in this thread playing devils advocate.
Things that are independently useable and move independently should
be versioned independently. The specs are both in this case.
Its not worth the overhead.
* * *
I'm not sure that we will ever agree with each other. I'm not even
trying to convince you or anyone else... cause at this point I simply
don't care. I commented only because I believed your statements were
a little overly simplified and misleading in the larger, longer term
picture.
But, what do I know... I've been wrong before.
I'm sick and tired of this argument though, so just pick something
and do it.
--jason
