Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
Andreas Hartmann wrote:
[...]
<module xmlns="http://apache.org/lenya/module/1.0";>
<id>org.apache.lenya.modules.jackrabbit</id>
<depends module="org.apache.lenya.modules.repository"/>
<depends module="org.apache.lenya.modules.jcr"/>
<package>org.apache.lenya.modules</package>
<version>0.1-dev</version>
<name>Jackrabbit Repository Module</name>
<lenya-version>@lenya.version@</lenya-version>
<description>Jackrabbit JCR Implementation (see
org.apache.lenya.modules.jcr Module)</description>
</module>
Versions are not considered yet by the build process, this might be
added in the future.
nice. we need a way to handle name clashes though. how about prefixing
modules with either "core-", "optional-" or "custom-", where custom is
always site-specific?
We could add this to the module ID:
<id>org.apache.lenya.modules.core.workflow-api</id>
core modules would be maintained and thoroughly tested all the time by
every lenya developer (i.e. must not be broken at any time, unless major
refactoring is under way, and then they must be fixed asap), optional
modules included in the tree but maintained by single people and thus
may be broken sometimes or remain in a proof-of-concept stage for a
while, and custom modules are out-of-tree modules created by users for
their own deployments.
A general question:
Can we enforce such guidelines in our community?
If yes, should we add this to the project guidelines?
-- Andreas
--
Andreas Hartmann
Wyona Inc. - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
