Writing from the perspective of this roadmap: http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgNo=27450
.... If I were working on Struts NEXT (or 2.x), I'd agree that it would be best to start with a clean slate. My suggestion would be to make it a story-and-test driven design. That's how I write my own applications now, and it works beautifully. We'd of course adopt a lot of code outright, but it would be better to think before pasting :) But, I don't agree that we can discontinue work on Struts 1.x while people chug away on Struts 2.x. I'm using SVN fulltime now. I strongly prefer SVN to CVS. I do plan to keep applying patches people submit to the Struts 1.x series. I would prefer to apply those patches using SVN rather than CVS. I would also prefer to have the complete change-history under SVN, which is something the conversion scripts would buy us. And, I would also strongly prefer that we complete the migration to Maven for 1.3 :) It appears that a Struts 1.2.4 GA release is imminent. Accordingly, I would ask that we give Don the go-ahead on the SVN conversion, so we can shuffle things around into subprojects (as long-intended), and put each subproject on Maven. We had projected Sept 17 for the SVN date, which is today. I think we should stick to that, regardless of the failed 1.2.3 distribution, and let Don go ahead. If 1.2.4 doesn't make the grade, we can roll 1.2.5 under SVN. It's not a big deal. -Ted. On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 04:48:54 -0400, James Mitchell wrote: > On the topic of Maven and SVN... > > SVN: > We have discussed moving our current repository over to SVN and I > know there are fancy scripts to do the conversion and all. We also > have been discussing what 1.2.x, 1.3.x, and maybe 1.4.x will be > adding vs. what 2.0 will bring. > > Would it make sense just to 'start 2.0 from scratch'? What I mean > is, we can have SVN setup for 2.0 development without the confusion > and mess of the existing repository. I know SVN makes moving > files/directories easy, but given the minimum specs we intend to > move to, there is just too many hacks and old code in the existing > source for supporting the old specs. Starting with a clean slate > just seems to make the most sense to me. Do you agree? > > > Maven: > I have spent many hours over the last few weeks over in the commons > sandbox 'playing around' with Maven (pun intended). I moved the > Hibernate resource implementation (and tests) over to sf.net. Both > distributions are 100% mavenized. > > I may have been critical of Maven in the past, but I have earned a > new appreciation for this tool. It really is far superior to just > using Ant. I believe no matter what path we take, with regards to > SVN, that we should move our primary build system to Maven. We > will lose nothing from what the current Ant script does, and yes, I > am volunteering to help with this. > > So, that said, I am +1 for setting up a clean slate (2.0) on SVN > and making it a 100% Mavenized build (multiproject). > > > Your thoughts? > > > -- > James Mitchell > Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist > EdgeTech, Inc. > 678.910.8017 > AIM: jmitchtx --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
