+1 for Sean's proposal..
On 1/5/06, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'll attempt the reorg tomorrow if I don't hear any objections. > Please try to get your comments in by then since its simpler to do > email iterations vs. svn iterations I'll make a copy of everything in > the legacy folder and we can always go back or further refine. > > Lets try to get the svn shuffle over with ASAP so we can get back to > the nightly builds and another release. > > Sean > > On 1/5/06, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 1/5/06, Bernd Bohmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Here is a more detail description of my thoughts > > > > > > If myfaces is a project without separate release cycle, a possible svn > > > structure: > > > > > > myfaces/trunk/api > > > myfaces/trunk/impl > > > myfaces/trunk/commons > > > myfaces/trunk/tomahawk > > > myfaces/trunk/sandbox > > > myfaces/trunk/examples or the examples belongs to the subprojects > > > myfaces/trunk/assembly or build-tool(s) with checkstyle configuration, > > > assembly maven plugin... > > > > > > I like the parent refs in the pom.xml. I don't like the svn externals > > > they are painful for branching and taging. > > > > Can you give me the arguments for parent refs? I still haven't heard > > a good reason. I'm not against the idea, I just don't know what they > > give you (other then a common version.) I think we can all agree that > > the externals are suboptimal. The question is what to do about it. > > > > > If myfaces has separate release cycles, a possible structure would be: > > > > > > myfaces/core/trunk/api > > > myfaces/core/trunk/impl > > > myfaces/core/trunk/example > > > myfaces/core/trunk/assembly > > > > > > myfaces/commons/trunk > > > > > > myfaces/tomahawk/trunk > > > myfaces/tomahawk/trunk/example > > > myfaces/tomahawk/trunk/assembly > > > > > > > > > myfaces/sandbox/trunk > > > myfaces/sandbox/trunk/example > > > myfaces/sandbox/trunk/assembly > > > > > > maybe a > > > > > > myfaces/common-examples/trunk > > > > > > and > > > > > > myfaces/[build|build-tool(s)]/trunk for checkstyle pmd maven-plugins > > > > A good start. Here is a revised proposal based on Bernd's original one > > > > core > > ==== > > myfaces/core/trunk/api > > myfaces/core/trunk/impl > > myfaces/core/trunk/assembly > > > > commons > > ======= > > myfaces/commons/trunk > > > > tomahawk > > ======= > > > > myfaces/tomahawk/trunk > > myfaces/tomahawk/trunk/example > > myfaces/tomahawk/trunk/assembly > > myfaces/sandbox/trunk > > myfaces/sandbox/trunk/example > > myfaces/sandbox/trunk/assembly > > > > maven-tools > > ========= > > > > custom maven plugins, etc. > > > > NOTES: > > > > I took out the examples from core. The examples are 99% tomahawk > > related (other then the blank example which shows basic setup.) I > > think its easier to just leave examples out of core instead of having > > two copies, separate examples or svn externals. > > > > I merged sandbox and tomahawk together. A while back we decided to > > put the sandbox stuff in the tomahawk.jar. Since the sandbox is > > experimental it doesn't need its own release cycle. Also, stuff moves > > from sandbox to tomahawk so you will often update both anyways. The > > examples for tomahawk would be the current examples (minus sandbox). > > The sandbox examples would go under sandbox. > > > > > With the second option I expect faster release cycles. This would be > > > nice for a faster tobago and adf integration. > > > > Yes faster release cycles would be good. I suppose MyFaces commons > > will be released everytime *either* the core or tomahawk stuff is > > released. There are bound to be minor changes either time. That > > still saves us the trouble of branching, testing and merging the core > > stuff. > > > > We had talked about a core project a while ago - but as an > > svn:external. I like this better. You are correct that branching and > > tagging will be much easier. > > > > > Which a snapshot repository or a mavenized released version on a maven > > > repository, it should not be a problem to checkout tomahawk only and > > > compile it (indepent of the first option or the second option). > > > > I had thought about this. Is there a way to tell Maven "Use my local > > repository if it is newer then the maven repository?" Things could > > get kind of confusing if you are using your latest commons code in the > > IDE but Maven is using the last official release ... > > > > > Best Regards > > > > > > Bernd > > > > Sean > > >
