On Wed, 2013-06-12 at 11:49 -0400, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Oleg Kalnichevski <[email protected]>wrote: > > > On Wed, 2013-06-12 at 11:21 -0400, Gary Gregory wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Oleg Kalnichevski <[email protected] > > >wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, 2013-06-12 at 11:10 -0400, Gary Gregory wrote: > > > > > Can I step back a second and ask why we are not sharing a > > checkstyle.xml > > > > > file, for example, the way we do it in Log4j 2, which is also a > > > > > multi-module project? > > > > > > > > > > Gary > > > > > > > > > > > > > That is the whole point of publishing module: to make it re-usable as a > > > > binary artifact by all HC projects. > > > > > > > > > > I understand the point of it, but it sure seems more complicated that > > just > > > having a file sitting in the root directory. > > > > > > > In the root directory of what exactly? We now have 4 (or maybe even > > more) instances of hc-stylecheck.xml sitting around in various > > directories. > > > > Ah, I just looked at the directory layout of log4j2 vs. httpcomponents and > I see that both projects have a different approach to laying out modules. > > Log4j2 puts the 'project file' at the root and the submodules in > subdirectories. > > Gary >
Gary, Obviously this approach works well for a group of modules that share the same release cycle. In HC land we have three components with different release cycles which makes our situation considerably more complex. Oleg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
