> On Sep 3, 2015, at 218PM, Bryan Thompson <br...@systap.com> wrote: > > Spinning off a 2.2.2 modularization effort to me sounds like it could > create some confusion and undermine the 3.0 release. I'd rather focus the > modularization effort into 3.0. Modularization is a huge pain and the > payoff is long term. Rather not pay it twice.
I have created a script that generates a modularized project based on the project created jars (take a look at modularize/ModularizeRiver.groovy). I was thinking of starting with that as a way to keep the projects in synch for now. So it’s already on it’s way, shouldn’t be that big of a deal to turn the crank. > > Yes. Big ant projects with checked in binaries. Exactly that model. > > We are managing to keep evolution running in parallel with modularization. > > One thing that made life easier was switching from SVN to git. This made > the merges much easier to manage. Exactly what we went through as well, switched from svn to git. Also follow this branching model: http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/ > > Although a recent git convert, I would be very much in favor of switching > to git for river (after a release). +1 Dennis
