On Tuesday 17 October 2017 23:16:30 Robert Munteanu wrote: > On Tue, 2017-10-17 at 16:22 +0300, Robert Munteanu wrote: > > On Tue, 2017-10-17 at 13:03 +0000, Justin Edelson wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 8:49 AM Robert Munteanu <[email protected] > > > > > > wrote: > > > > Perhaps the people that actually work with these multi-project > > > > extensions would like to comment? By a quick check we have: > > > > > > > > - models > > > > > > The models bundles can be released independently, i.e. I've done a > > > number > > > of releases of the implementation bundle without touching the API > > > bundle. > > > > > > While Konrad is correct that ITs are an issue, my strong preference > > > with > > > Sling Models is to minimize the use of ITs, i.e. use them only for > > > code > > > paths which are difficult to test via a unit test, so I don't > > > really > > > see > > > that as an issue. > > > > +1, ideally most changes would be covered by an unit test, not an > > integration test. Even so, validation has its pax-exam ITs in the > > core > > bundle, only the test content is outside of the bundle. > > Any other comments? At this point I'm inclined to go with git > repository per module, given that we should cover fixes with > integration tests rather than unit tests.
I guess we are able to also move the test services into the core module and create a bundle for them with Tiny Bundles (already discussed in the past but no time for implementing it so far). Strong +1 for one Git repo per module (to keep it simple also). Thanks again for your great work, Robert! Regards, O. > Thanks, > > Robert
