Just to be clear - these are three repos available currently: https://github.com/apache/?utf8=%E2%9C%93&query=tamaya
In order to request a new repo, you have to be on the IPMC. I can submit the request. Let me know if you need more. John On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 10:47 AM Werner Keil <[email protected]> wrote: > The second two sound a bit narrow, but if the idea is to create further > repos if another "use case" for tamaya comes up with stable enough modules, > I guess it should work. > If everything other than "sandbox" was "extensions", I am not sure, if two > make sense or one could not be easier (and divide inside the repo into > "types-format", "integration" or other) > > Especially since "sandbox" as "incubator inside the incubator" may contain > all sorts of sanbox modules, so IMHO if we separate for one and not the > other, it sounds a bit inconsistent. > > WDYT? > > > On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Oliver B. Fischer < > [email protected] > > wrote: > > > So, if no one objects until Monday evening we will have to following > three > > repos.(?) > > > > - tamaya-sandbox > > - tamaya-types-format-extensions > > - tamaya-integration-extensions > > > > Correct? > > > > > > Am 10.09.16 um 16:11 schrieb Werner Keil: > > > >> Or better in "each of these repos";-) > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Werner Keil <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >> What for, "modules" vs. "integration" e.g. for things like consule, > etcd, > >>> etc. or how would they be told apart? > >>> If "modules" and "sandbox" already exist, I guess we can also find a > >>> logical structure for POMs in one repo, so I'm open here. > >>> > >>> Werner > >>> > >>> > >>> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Oliver B. Fischer < > >>> [email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > > -- > > N Oliver B. Fischer > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany > > P +49 30 44793251 > > M +49 178 7903538 > > E [email protected] > > S oliver.b.fischer > > J [email protected] > > X http://xing.to/obf > > > > >
