Kevan/all, About the final 1.0 tag, I see there are different patterns across Apache projects. Cordova uses a simple "1.x.x" pattern for almost every tag, while many other projects from Geronimo to TomEE chose a "project-1.x.x" tag naming.
So it would be either "1.0.0" or "devicemap-1.0.0". Not sure, if we'd add something like "devicemap-data" in case of sub-repositories. ActiveMQ did that rather fine grained for sub-projects like "activemq-cpp". While leaving existing incubator tags seems fine, we should stick to a consistent line from 1.0 on if possible[?] Werner On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Werner Keil <[email protected]> wrote: > Kevan/all, > > Thanks for the effort (Reza) and positive feedback. The reason that at > least the "DDR Simple" part of the "java" tree is currently disabled and > was not tagged is a dependency to W3C DDR itself that doesn't exist in a > Maven-compatible form: > <dependency> > <groupId>org.w3c</groupId> > <artifactId>ddr-simple</artifactId> > <version>20081205</version> > </dependency> > > It was made available on GitHub: https://github.com/fnk/w3c-ddr > but e.g. the repository from that Readme no longer exists. I placed a > copy under /contrib/w3c but we need to find proper handling of such > mandatory 3rd party library that so far has not been published to > MavenCentral or a similar place by the W3C. Eclipse calls this type of > repository "Orbit", I can't say, if a similar default place for 3rd party > dependencies exists at Apache. Since this was released by W3C (AFAIK the > version we have is the most recent one) we must treat it as external > depencendy, but either through our Maven build chain or independently > ensure, that modules like the DDR Client for Java can access it. > > The parent POM in theory could have been tagged together with the artifact > that's part of the release, but if that is not a problem now, we could do > that as soon as the best way is found for the DDR Simple client. > > Regards, > Werner > > On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 6:01 PM, Kevan Miller <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Reza <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > oops :) I forgot to put in the LICENSE/NOTICE the 2nd time around. It >> was >> > in there the first time. I just updated it, so its in now. >> > >> > So Bertrand said he wanted a release "preview" before we do our first >> > initial release. This is the preview. >> > >> >> Yep, which is great. Happy to see the progress. And thanks for pulling >> this >> together! >> >> I saw that the *java* release was not a full subset of the "java" tree. >> Which is all fine. Just wanted to be sure there was an understanding... >> >> >> > >> > >>Can you explain how these releases relate to the current trunk in svn? >> > >> > So we have a handful of different subprojects in the svn. This is the >> data >> > component and the java api. >> > >> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/devicemap/trunk/data/device-data >> > >> > >> > >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/devicemap/trunk/devicemap/java/classifier >> > >> > >> > >> 1 >> > >> > Fixed. My mistake. >> > >> > >> 2 >> > >> > I pulled everything out of the trunk, so if something needs to be fixed, >> > no problem. >> > >> >> If the Modernizr and matchMedia.js licenses are removed from the NOTICE >> (as >> noted by Bertrand) in all locations (trunk, tags, source releases), things >> should be good. >> >> --kevan >> >> >> > >> > >> 3 >> > >> > I did not include a README inside the tarball. For now, its on my >> website >> > link: >> > >> > http://www.rezsoft.org/devicemap/ >> > >> > >
