Hi Robert, Well, how easy would it be to create folders from those group names and then clone all modules belonging to a group into that folder? Any other module could very well be cloned in the root folder (current working directory). So I guess I'm more of a nested structure fan. :)
Thanks, Radu On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 at 10:53 Robert Munteanu <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Radu, > > On Mon, 2017-11-06 at 08:22 +0000, Radu Cotescu wrote: > > Hello, > > > > After using the Sling Aggregator [0] to clone all modules I was > > wondering > > if somebody else missed the previous "functional" structure of the > > modules > > or not. While I fully support the 1 module / SCM repository code > > organisation, I think that sometimes it's beneficial to have a > > reactor that > > would build all related modules with one command. > > There are two issues in your email: > > - generating reactor poms > - nested vs flat structure > > I think both are fine to have, if we agree on the structure. > > I have already added some basic support for grouping repositories, see > > https://github.com/apache/sling-aggregator/blob/81b3367168e97cb2702d960 > ff883bc1ca7425693/default.xml#L193-L214 > <https://github.com/apache/sling-aggregator/blob/81b3367168e97cb2702d960ff883bc1ca7425693/default.xml#L193-L214> > > The logic is 'look for the first segment in the repo name after org- > apache-sling and create a group if two or more repos have it'. > > We can of course enhance it, but let's first lay down some grouping > rules and decide where to place repositories outside of any groups. > > Thanks, > > Robert >
