I've seen you guys started committing things related to the distribution structure. Could you as well make the agreed adjustments on the trunk directory structure as they are two tightly related operations?
Are we sticking to the features + distribution + shades folders? I think the new distro structure enables us to reduce all that to a single directory. On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 11:24 PM, Luciano Resende <[email protected]>wrote: > On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 12:53 AM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: > > Totally agree with that. We should be trying hard to make trunk as small, > > quick and easy to build as possible so should put stuff thats deemed not > > quite ready yet somewhere else. If something isn't ready to be released > or > > build by the Hudson nightly build why should everybody else in the world > > who's trying to build Tuscany have to try to check it out, build it, and > get > > all the extra dependencies. > > Well, I guess couple of the community members like the ability to > include these modules as part of their development environment (e.g. > ability to generate IDE files as source dependencies, and have an > option to build together with other modules). Downloading these extra > sources will not really cause side effects to other developers, unless > they have to build it as part of the main profile, and from my > previous post, I was kind suggesting that, as long as the things that > are being brought up are built somewhere (e.g. Hudson), I'm fine with > this... > > > > The sandbox or contrib area outside of trunk > > seem much more appropriate places to put not yet ready things. > > Now you got me totally confused... I have seen multiple e-mails from > you asking people to develop in trunk [1], but now you are suggesting > we go do development out of trunk ? Could you please clarify ? > > [1] http://markmail.org/message/nfizqwiviwsem5mi > > > > -- > Luciano Resende > http://people.apache.org/~lresende > http://twitter.com/lresende1975 > http://lresende.blogspot.com/ >
