Alex,
Thanks for picking this
On 04/06/12 14:02, Alexander Dutton wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi all,
I'd like to get the git mirrors updated to reflect the recent SVN repo
migration.
The way the tags and branches are laid out won't play well with
git-svn, as each tag or branch is currently of an individual
component, not the entire project as laid out in trunk. Thus, it's
probably easier to not mirror the tags and branches for the Git mirrors.
Even though the entire project is now in one trunk/branches/tags tree,
I still think there's value in having separate Git mirrors for each
component. (Git doesn't allow clones of parts of repositories, so to
have a single mirror would mean one would have to clone everything,
and see history of all components; it'd be less 'focussed')
So, I propose to create an INFRA ticket containing the following. Do I
need a lazy consensus?
It's not a one-way disruptive change and it is a consequence of the code
shuffle we have agreed and enacted so letting the project know and
filing the INFRA seems fine to me.
Hmm - modules depend on the parent (if maven built and the parent is
../jena-parent/pom.xml) so you do need that. And the module POMs need
to know where the snapshot repositories are. So even if <relativePath>
picks the POM out of the maven repo it will only work when that's in
central.
Good news is that the parent POM is much slimmer now. Basically, the
apache snapshot repos, and some simple dependencies (logging, junit) and
plugin versions. Some of this may be duplicated (still) in module POMs.
"""
Jena recently graduated to become a top-level project, and so its
repositories have moved out of the incubator. The developers have also
taken the opportunity to change the layout of the SVN repos.
Would it be possible to have the following updated:
jena-arq → http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/trunk/jena-arq/
jena-core → http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/trunk/jena-core/
jena-eyeball left alone
jena-fuseki → http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/trunk/jena-fuseki/
jena-iri → http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/trunk/jena-iri/
jena-jenatop left alone
jena-joseki left alone
jena-larq → http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/trunk/jena-larq/
jena-sdb → http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/trunk/jena-sdb/
jena-site → http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/site/ (with normal
trunk/branches/tags layout)
jena-tdb → http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/trunk/jena-sdb/
It'd be good if all could have " (Incubating)" removed from their labels.
"""
Should apache-jena, jena-examples and jena-parent be added to the
list? Should jena-eyeball, jena-jenatop and jena-joseki be removed?
I'd say remove jena-top - it's not used anymore.
apache-jena isn't code - its the download packaging so on it's own isn't
very interesting.
I have no opinion about the rest.
How about also having the whole tree as a git repo?
jena → http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/trunk/
then anyone can use git to get the entire build, e.g if they want to run
a parallel CI setup for different compilers (e.g. IBM's JDK).
If that seems like a good idea we can say "use a specific module and
work in Eclipse (or you need to set up the environment your self) or
work from the active tree and be able to do the whole build".
The main build job now does a svn checkout of jena/trunk and runs "mvn
clean deploy" in the trunk directory.
Andy
All the best,
Alex
- --
Alexander Dutton
Developer, InfoDev; data.ox.ac.uk, OxPoints
Oxford University Computing Services
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPzLHaAAoJEPotabD1ANF7NV0IAJQpzmPRbfGUQV6hYL0ouLpd
VVX4T8a1T4vwI6uamfPS3/FyUpKht4trah6Ml6Q/zyc4J6I/CyPURWblbqVnLuRX
Kgz6cRLKoGiWDcAfDppmTzK6MUq3zjPdbTSPtVmWrRZ45Aw4fabkaZ3QfKqv60S9
jaaAJTDNd6z/YyWLnDz/L1qdJ959IiLVXnljVTWANnMYVqll2Qc4E6W/lj7jaEFN
uqlQ1NPXiHK71cAEVLL/vXl1c6Q46GSZ7Nd8G5C1ITNvc7c2d2w6zTvGGv2e3Ccw
s/jmMOS/kQumWweWIxQYlCMoR0gH+MyEX31wEi2UlLeIsdWeKAbxgv0oYygSMac=
=1TNg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
