I don't have a vote here, but I'd agree with Jörn: Separate repos will make it more uncomfortable to track changes across components.
Should the project switch to a uniform versioning and joint releases, that would also be more problematic. The project is not particularly large. Having everything in a single repo is more convenient and traceable. Cheers, -- Richard > On 19.08.2016, at 11:48, Anthony Beylerian <anthony.beyler...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > +1 for separate repositories. > > Since they will be under the Apache Github Organization, it will also be > neater to browse them like this: > > https://github.com/apache?query=opennlp > > I recommend we keep the repository names starting with opennlp-.... > > For example : > > https://github.com/apache?query=hadoop > > What do you think? > > Best, > > Anthony > > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 6:32 PM, Aliaksandr Autayeu <aliaksa...@autayeu.com> > wrote: > >>> >>> Why do you think it is better? >>> >> In general, separating apples from oranges. In practice, not having to go >> through irrelevant stuff while reading, searching, refactoring. Less stuff >> to clone for build automation. Smaller repos to clone in general. >> >> And you still can do all the above by cloning 4 repos into the same >> directory and setting up a single project in your favorite IDE, emulating >> current structure. But at least nothing forces you to do that as single >> repo forces you to. >> >> However, the above might be subjective. In this case commitocracy it is to >> decide. >>
