Re: Source Repository Organization and Release Strategy Thoughts

[James Mitchell]

+1 for framework

--
James Mitchell




On Jul 18, 2006, at 12:19 AM, Craig McClanahan wrote:

On 7/17/06, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On 7/16/06, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Before doing so, it's probably worth spending some time figuring out how

we
> want the source repository to be organized
...
> What do you think?

I don't see the need to release things separately right now.  Once
again we have people asking for a shale-test release, and there have
been enough changes in shale-core and shale-clay that it makes sense
to go ahead and release the whole thing.

For the examples, it seems like we would always want to update them to

depend on the latest framework jars, so we might as well just version
them together with the framework and release it all at once.

Possibly...
   shale/framework/trunk/
   shale/maven/trunk/
   shale/sandbox/

The 'framework' directory could be called something else... I'd just
as soon have shale/shale/trunk, but Ted says it will confuse viewvc.

I can buy into "framework" at this level ... that's exactly the word I use

after Shale to describe what it really is.

Sandbox doesn't need trunk/branches/tags, you can just copy

sandbox/projectA to sandbox/projectB if you want to try something
else.

Sounds good.

The other consideration is that I can't modify the nightly builds script remotely until this coming Sunday night, so any changes we make in the next

few days will temporarily break those.

--

Wendy

Craig