On 7/18/06, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Possibly... > shale/framework/trunk/ > shale/maven/trunk/ > shale/sandbox/ > > The 'framework' directory could be called something else... I'd just > as soon have shale/shale/trunk, but Ted says it will confuse viewvc. +1 for these three separate projects. We defnitely could use a sandbox for our works in progress. What about shale/core/trunk instead of framework?
That would introduce a potential conflict at the next lower level ... "core" is also a referent to the main framework library.
Sandbox doesn't need trunk/branches/tags, you can just copy > sandbox/projectA to sandbox/projectB if you want to try something > else. Good point. Sandbox is never released so it doesn't need to be tagged. I'm thinking we would want nightly builds of the sandbox but the version would always be 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT. Sandbox stuff would go in the Shale JIRA instance I assume? I don't think we want its own instance.
Agreed.
Wendy Sean
Craig
