I don't see why it would need a vote. It sounds like a good plan to me.
+1 (just in case) On 20 Nov 2014 16:06, "Greg Trasuk" <tras...@stratuscom.com> wrote: > > Actually, I had a better idea. > > How about if I pull out the ‘tools’ package to a separate Maven project > and integrate the changes that Peter did on qa_refactor? Then both the 2.2 > branch and qa_refactor can use the same tools. > > Process would be as follows: > > - Create a project in Apache git repo for ‘river-tools’ > - Create a Maven project (I’ll have a look at the modularization that > Dennis did, I suspect this is already done) in that repository > - Integrate Peter’s updates from qa-refactor (which update to use asm-5 in > classdep) > - Do a release on river-tools, so that tools.jar can go into Maven Central > - Remove tools packages from 2.2. branch. Modify build to get tools.jar > from Central rather than building it. > - I can update qa_refactor at the same time. > - Roll a release of the 2.2. branch. > > Which will leave a 2.2. release that builds under JDK1.8, qa_refactor that > uses the same tool, and one less piece of build system confusion to put off > new committers. > > Opinions? Does this need a vote? > > Cheers, > > Greg Trasuk. > > On Nov 19, 2014, at 3:19 PM, Greg Trasuk <tras...@stratuscom.com> wrote: > > > Hi all: > > > > I’m working on getting the build system, particularly ‘classdepandjar’ > to work under JDK8. While I’m in there, I’m wondering if I should rename > the affected package, ‘com.sun.jini.tool’, to ‘org.apache.river.tool’ or > some such thing. > > > > Any opinions? I would have to change the reference to classdepandjar in > the build scripts, but obviously it would also affect any external build > scripts that use it. I suppose I could leave a wrapper class in > ‘com.sun.jini.tool’ so as not to affect build scripts. > > > > Opinions? > > > > Cheers, > > > > Greg Trasuk > > > >
