So, in order to go on with adding / accepting new modules / subprojects (such as the cayenne integration module discussed at http://markmail.org/message/5l7xi6srkcfwepeo ) and have a clear vision of how things will be, let me recap the alternatives mentioned here...
1) New modules live in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tapestry/tapestry5/trunk/ Releases are performed for all subprojects at the exact same time (and hence for the same version). This process is what we currently employ and thus requires no further explanation. 2) New modules can be created outside of https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tapestry/tapestry5/trunk/ perhaps in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tapestry/tapestry5-module-name. Releases will not have to be performed at the same exact time for all those new subprojects BUT when they do occur they have to use the exact version number of the tapestry core modules they target. The differences in this process are: a) each module gets its own truck, branches and tags. This allows the module to also release versions compatible with older tapestry versions if there's such a need (so tapestry-cayenne can release a 5.2.x version) b) timing of the releases doesn't have to coincide 100% - so, "unfinished" subprojects don't have to stall the rest of the releases. Additionally, it becomes easier to accept "experimental" subprojects c) it might not be possible to guarantee same release numbers in all subprojects - that would result in maintenance and support problems as well as user frustration Now, we haven't run a vote on which to choose as my original intention in this thread was to get a first understanding of what the other devs think on the matter. From the responses, I get that most prefer to keep things as described in 1), so there's no real point in running a vote... but as i said, it's good to see where everyone stands :) Thx. On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 19:47, Massimo Lusetti <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 6:47 PM, Massimo Lusetti <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Howard Lewis Ship <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I also agree; we now have consistent tests to ensure that tapestry-ioc >>> 5.3.7 works with tapestry-core 5.3.7 works with tapestry-spring 5.3.7. >>> If each had its own version, you end up in a situation where you need >>> complex tables to try and guess which version goes with which other. >>> I guess inter-module dependencies may streamline this, but I think it >>> still is more complicated than having a consistent version number. >> >> Having a separate release engineering is totally different from >> version number but I agree with the fact that a precise and consistent >> dependency management. > > ... a precise and consistent dependency management have to be present > before starting to separate projects. > > Cheers > -- > Massimo > http://meridio.blogspot.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > -- Andreas Andreou - [email protected] - http://blog.andyhot.gr Tapestry PMC / Tacos developer Open Source / JEE Consulting --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
