ok perhaps I should have made myself clearer.
By merge I meant repository merge, not project merge in the same sense
DP and DA were merged into Core. So this would not change the binary
dependency tree.
I agree about the point of "what should I reference, I don't want to use
Windsor for Transactions project, do I have to now?". We went through it
already with current release of Windsor and Core which have logging
facility and adapters packaged with them. I didn't head anyone asking if
Core has now dependency on NLog or loggg4net, but i agree that making
this even more explicit in a readme file would be helpful.
Doing this (merge) is a good thing for several reasons
- we have less repositories to manage
- we have less work to do when updating interdependent projects. For
example previously if I made a change in Core that ATM Facility
requires, I would then have to update core, update binary reference to
Core in DynamicProxy, update DynamicProxy, update binary reference to
both of tem inWindsor, update Windsor, update binary reference to
Windsor in the facility, update TXServices reference to Core, update
TXServices, update ATMFacility reference to TXServices and finally
update the facility. - And yes I have done things like that in the past
and it's a major PITA.
- we have less work updating projects since we now release and package
them together. As for you concern about more frequent updates because of
that - I don't see this as an issue. We didn't release very often in the
past, and I don't think we suddenly start now.
Krzysztof
On 2010-05-21 04:37, John Simons wrote:
> What do you think about these merges, and what do you think we should
> do about "dead" repositories?
Delete works for me, and announce it on mailing list and website
> I also think we should merge few other smaller projects into one to
> minimize the administrative overhead:
There is a big distinction between merging projects and
packaging/releasing them together.
I don't agree with merging projects, keep them separate, look at the
consequences of merging Core + DictionaryAdapter + DP2 for Transactions,
The Transactions project was only dependent on Core and now it has to
reference all that dead weight.
Also, for releases is a PITA, because we now have to have more
releases (3 projects into 1 = more releases = constant updates =
unhappy users) and also again Transaction has to be released even if
all the fixes in Core were actually just fixes to DP2 or
DictionaryAdapter (which in my opinion tend to be updated a lot more
frequent than the original Core).
So "minimize the administrative overhead", for who?
Assuming we go ahead with these "merges",
How about the packaging of the software?
eg:
Transactions + ATM is now all in one package, all binaries would be in
the bin folder in zip file
User only wants to use Transaction, what assemblies does the user need
to reference?
Definetly not Windsor, but wait Windsor is in the bin folder.
So we need to document all this, maybe a readme file.
As I previously stated, in my opinion, "integration projects" should
be managed/updated by both project leader and released by either one
if one of the projects gets updated.
The solution is not merging, but better releasing.
Just my 2cents
John
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Gauthier Segay <[email protected]>
*To:* Castle Project Development List
<[email protected]>
*Sent:* Fri, 21 May, 2010 8:09:18 AM
*Subject:* Re: What to do about dead repositories
> What do you think about these merges
I'm wondering about people using ActiveRecord and or
Services.Transactions which would not like to depend on Windsor ? is
it something we should take care of?
> what do you think we should do about "dead" repositories?
emptying them and just leave a readme with follow-up note :
"""
Castle.DynamicProxy has been merged into Castle.Core, please find
latest version of Castle.Core at
http://github.com/castleproject/Castle.Core
"""
On May 20, 4:20 pm, Krzysztof Koźmic (2) <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> We have few repositories now on Github that point to projects that
> aren't developed on their own anymore:
>
> - DynamicProxy, which was merged into Core
> - DictionaryAdapter which was merged into Core
> - InversionOfControl, it is all Windsor now so perhaps the name should
> reflect that?
>
> I also think we should merge few other smaller projects into one to
> minimize the administrative overhead:
>
> - Castle.Facilities.AutomaticTransactionManagement and
> Castle.Services.Transaction should be kept together
>
> - Castle.Facilities.ActiveRecordIntegration should live with
> ActiveRecord
>
> - Castle.Facilities.Synchronize should live with Windsor?
>
> What do you think about these merges, and what do you think we should
> do about "dead" repositories?
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Castle Project Development List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
> For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Castle Project Development List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Castle Project Development List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
[email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle
Project Development List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en.
