Hi, To answer quickly, It is a revolution (little). The code is at the mojo sandbox for now (mojo-sandbox/maven-archetypeng). I just uploaded a first snapshot at the mojo's snapshot repository I sent a mail on [EMAIL PROTECTED] to start havign some feedback. Please have try on it and review the code. mvn archetypeng:generate I am sorry but documentation is not yet written.
Will be happy to have the code reach the apache foundation. Best regards Raphaël Jason van Zyl-2 wrote: > > > On 4 Mar 07, at 12:50 PM 4 Mar 07, Brett Porter wrote: > >> On 04/03/2007, at 7:26 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: >> >>> You might want to sync up with raphael over in mojo where he's >>> taking a swing at a new version of archetype. >> >> Raphael - can you tell us what is happening over here? (Pretty sure >> you're still subscribed). Wendy's asked me to look at something, >> and I'd be happy to, but I don't want to later find out the work is >> irrelevant if I do it here. >> >> My 2 questions would be: >> a) is this an evolution or a revolution? ie, would rapid >> application of patches here be appropriate, or is it a >> compatibility-breaking attempt at making it work from scratch? >> b) is the intent to bring it back here when it's done? >> >> Personally, I find this a little weird. If it ever intends to come >> back here we should be discussing it here now. > > The intention is if he's happy with it, and can be slotted in then > great. He's not even finished but working and might want to offer > something. I suggested Wendy look at and decide what she think is > better to hack on. If it works I am happy to suggest it be moved here. > >> If it's not, then we might as well carry on as is, right? I just >> need to know which it is so I don't waste any time. >> >>> He doesn't have access at Apache so he's doing it at Mojo. >> >> That's lame. > > It's not lame, it's what we have always been doing. He's > experimenting, he wanted somewhere to put it and he has access. I > don't see how that is lame. > >> If it's something we want here, we should find a way to do it. I'd >> elect a committer based on past work and ability to state what he >> was going to do clearly here. Or something else, including using >> mojo as a scratch space, as long as everyone clearly understands >> what's going on. > > What he's working on is a prototype. He's trying to create a > replacement, and there's nothing wrong with him making the prototype > there. I pointed it out to Wendy so she knew. No one has touched the > code in quite a while, he's interested in working on it. He's got > access, he started right away, let him run with it. Absolutely > nothing wrong with that. I have no problem with him being a committer > either but while he wants to hack away let him work on it where he can. > > Jason. > >> >> - Brett >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-svn-commit%3A-r514184----maven-sandbox-trunk-archetype--tf3342776s177.html#a9321972 Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
