On 4/15/07, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 15/04/07, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/15/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Author: sebb
> > Date: Sun Apr 15 11:33:27 2007
> > New Revision: 529044
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=529044
> > Log:
> > Create minimal POM
> >
> > Added:
> > jakarta/commons/proper/cli/branches/avalon-implementation/pom.xml
(with props)
[...]
> Since this a new component, we should preferably discuss its creation
> (then have a vote if needed etc.).
Not sure I follow that - all I've done is create a Pom so it can be
built independently - the code has been in SVN for some while now,
waiting for someone to do a release (please!)
<snip/>
If we look at what defines a component in the maven sense, we are
talking about the {groupId,artifactId} tuple, which is new in the POM
you added (my comment was under the <artifactId> line, I should have
spelt that out instead). In terms of development in Commons, I think
of branches as potentially different lines of development of the same
component, rather than potentially different components.
For [cli], we've ended up with a divergent set of codebases and
releasing each is probably not making it better. Its confusing,
suboptimal, and hopefully, avoidable. If enough of us want to see more
than one cli-ish component released out of Commons, then IMO it would
be nice to (not in any temporal order):
* Treat this as component creation (rather than just another [cli]
release), and acceptance into Commons Proper is usually via a vote
* Have a [cli-avalon] site
* Have all cli-ish components' sites point to each other, explain why
there are more than one, why users should prefer one over the other
etc.
-Rahul
Sebb
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
