Hi Dev, Digging out this one month old unresolved thread.
I'd prefer getting everyone's +1 before performing the move. What's your take on this? Regards, Pierre-Arnaud On 6 juil. 2011, at 09:19, Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot wrote: > On 5 juil. 2011, at 22:53, Alex Karasulu wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> On 7/5/11 11:47 AM, Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot wrote: >>>> >>>> Just to be clear before I make the changes. >>>> >>>> Should I merge DIRSHARED into DIRAPI ? or DIRAPI into DIRSHARED? >>>> >>>> My choice would be the first option, as Shared is becoming the API. >>>> What's yours? >>> >>> DIRAPI is way better, IMHO. >> >> I suggest the opposite because of the investment that has gone into >> references for DIRSHARED. And at the end of the day it's still shared >> stuff across both main projects, studio and the server. There are more >> things that will go into this down the line besides LDAP. If we >> release later we can release just parts of it instead of the whole >> thing: meaning just the ldap api. >> >> We can still restructure but we're going to unsettle some references >> we've put even into the code around these issues from the past. If >> you're find with doing away with it then I can live with it but we >> will lose more. > > Hi Alex, > > I understand your point but hopefully JIRA is pretty well built and manages > to keep references perfectly. > > Have a look a recent issue a user created in a wrong JIRA project, > DIRSERVER-1630. > It has been created in the DIRSERVER project but I moved it later to DIRAPI, > since the issue was related to the LDAP API instead. > During the move of the issue JIRA gave a new ID to the issue in the DIRAPI > project, DIRAPI-47. > The old ID is still valid and the JIRA link > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRSERVER-1630 now redirects to the new > issue: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRAPI-47 > Lastly, in the Activity section of the issue ('All' sub-section selected), > the move has been registered with both origin and destination values > (project, version). > > So, as you see, I'm not really sure we're going to loose anything in the > migration... > > The only thing we'd probably want to do is to create new versions in the > DIRAPI project matching all versions of the DIRSHARED project. > Maybe with a prefix, to avoid any misunderstanding. > 0.9.19 in the DIRSHARED project would then become shared-0.9.19 in the DIRAPI > project. > > Thoughts? > > Regards, > Pierre-Arnaud > >> Regards, >> Alex >
