Greeting, Marcel, It's not my intention to try to talk anyone into changing how they release anything. For the things that are built with Maven, it's my preference to avoid exercising the maven-release-plugin's feature of handling multiple released items in a repo, but it's just a preference. If the acceptable compromise is to have less repos than releasable items (possibly as few as one repo), I'd personally rather do that than not move to git at all.
regards, benson On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Marcel Offermans <[email protected]> wrote: > On 24 October 2015 at 11:36:03, Benson Margulies > ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote: > >> > So I would definitely argue against getting a Git repository per bundle. >> > Per subproject sounds like the right granularity to me. >> >> If a subproject is released all at once, then we're completely >> agreeing. If not, then your preference means exercising the >> occasionally squishy part of the release plugin; maybe it will get >> fixed once and for all. > > So for the dependency manager we reasoned as follows: > > 1) When talking about releases within Apache, we are talking about source > code. Releasing that a subproject at a time makes sense to me as the code, > even if it ends up in different bundles, clearly belongs together. > > 2) Binary releases are a matter of convenience and “what is convenient” > depends a lot on where you’re coming from. A lot of people would argue that > putting a binary in Maven is convenient, but there are definitely other > options. The binary releases also don’t have to have a 1:1 mapping with the > source, so we can have N bundles being put in Maven and other repositories > all from the same source release. > > Greetings, Marcel > >
