I would echo Tim's comments, particularly around test client code. I'm in the middle of seperating things elsewhere that probably shouldn't have been lumped together initially.
Beyond that, the first thing infra will likely tell folks to do is to use http://reporeq.apache.org for any new repository requests (as I found out recently, but couldn't actually use it myself due to the specifics of what I needed done). Robbie On 1 February 2017 at 16:20, Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 02/01/2017 09:09 AM, Clebert Suconic wrote: >> >> +1 >> >> Although, can we use the opportunity to go beyond the tools you are >> thinking now? > > > I'd be careful of the amount of things lumped into one subproject especially > if they are unrelated to the focus of that project as it drags down the ease > of doing quick releases with targeted features. > >> >> >> there are a couple of other things that would be nice to be shared as >> well. For instance some openwire parsers, some testsuite libraries for >> AMQP that we share with a copy & paste inheritance between artemis and >> activemq. > > > I'd suggest that anything OpenWire related might be better slotted into the > openwire project that was created previously. And I'd think long and hard > about how far into the wild we let the AMQP test client bits go because once > it gets into a release outside of a test jar the likely hood of having to > support it to the general public grows. > >> >> >> I have been thinking also to split docs into a separate repo. We would >> still release docs connected to a version, but we could then make >> changes to docs independently of the release, without having to spin a >> broker release to fix eventual typos on the docs. >> >> So, can we have an extras repo, and have all these as part of the new >> repo? > > > Again putting unrelated things into the same subproject complicates the > timing of releases and muddies the focus of the project so I'd shy away for > lumping broker docs into a tooling subproject. > >> >> (I'm not so sure if docs should be mixed with this all, perhaps we >> still need a separate repo for docs.. but I wanted to throw out the >> idea now anyways). >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Christopher Shannon >> <christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> I'm going to ping infra to create a new project but wanted to get some >>> feedback from people first. The main motivation for this utility project >>> is >>> to create some command line store utilities for things like migrating a >>> KahaDB store to an Artemis store. >>> >>> I could request the name to be 'activemq-store-tools' or something like >>> that but we could also make it more generic such as 'activemq-cli-tools' >>> or >>> even just simply 'activemq-tools' if there is other stuff we wanted to >>> put >>> in there. Thoughts? >> >> >> > > > -- > Tim Bish > twitter: @tabish121 > blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/ >
