On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 08:56, Florin Ciubotaru <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Reviving the thread with a late -1.
Reviving this thread again after the release of 3.2. I'd like to get this problem fixed, so here's a proposal: https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-platform/tree/master/xwiki-platform-core/xwiki-platform-cache/xwiki-platform-cache-api becomes https://github.com/xwiki/platform/tree/master/core/cache/api The current strategy is to get longer and longer directory names, by copying the parent directory name and adding a suffix to it. While this keeps the current artifact ID in sync with the directory it sits in, it creates redundancy and is much too verbose. Plus, it creates the checkout problem on Windows. The proposed strategy is to remove all redundancy and instead have the artifact ID in sync with the directory structure starting from the git repository root. Still, there are a few things I'd like some feedback on: 1. Do we keep "xwiki" in the repository name or not? a) The "xwiki" part of the artifact ID is found in the organization name, so the repository name skips it: "platform", "rendering"... b) The organization name isn't going to be found on the user's filesystem, so it makes sense to keep it in the repository name: "xwiki-platform", "xwiki-rendering"... 2. What do we do with the "core+tools" split of some of the repositories? a) Keep it, which means that we'll not have 100% sync with some of the artifact ID, since "core" is not part of the artifactIds. b) Keep it and change the artifactIds of the core modules to include it c) Move the "core" modules to the root of the repository, keeping "tools" grouped under the tools subdirectory Personally, I'm: * +1 for 1a, +0 for 1b; the argument for b is not really valid, since users can change the directory name where their clone is going to be created, and most developers usually create a top level directory to hold the XWiki repositories by themselves anyway * -0 for 2a, since I'd like to have a clear and simple rule for mapping artifact IDs to directories, without having to add an "...except if the directory is named core..." exception to this rule; -0 for 2b, since I prefer not to change artifact IDs so often between versions; +1 for 2c, since it's going to bring the most important modules closer to the root. So, the one clear and simple rule to follow for naming directories and artifacts is: Assuming you checked out the XWiki repositories in a common folder called "xwiki", then the artifactId of any pom.xml file is the same as the path from the top "xwiki" directory to the current directory, with dashes between the names. > On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Denis Gervalle <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +0, using artifactid is longer, but a clear rule. And you have >> auto-completion and IDE, so why fear longer name ? >> > There an issue long paths on Windows as mentioned here: > http://xwiki.475771.n2.nabble.com/Unable-to-clone-platform-repository-on-windows-machines-redundant-directory-naming-td6363136.html > > Florin Ciubotaru > >> >> Denis >> >> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 15:49, Marius Dumitru Florea < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Same as Sergiu, I prefer shorter names but artifactId is not that bad. So >> > 0. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Marius >> > >> > On 04/05/2011 02:19 PM, Jerome Velociter wrote: >> > > On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 11:36 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu<[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> On 04/05/2011 11:03 AM, Vincent Massol wrote: >> > >>> Hi devs, >> > >>> >> > >>> The proposal is to use artifactid as directory names. >> > >>> >> > >>> Note that this is what I did for commons and rendering when I did the >> > move to top level project. You can check how it looks like here: >> > >>> http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/commons/ >> > >>> http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/rendering/ >> > >>> >> > >>> I suggest we keep one strategy only for consistency. >> > >>> >> > >>> Some discussion here too: >> > >>> >> > >> http://www.sonatype.com/people/2011/01/maven-tip-project-directories-and-artifact-ids/ >> > >>> >> > >>> I know there are some cons (see my comment in the link above) but >> > overall I find it simple to implement and with autocompletion not such a >> big >> > issue. >> > >>> >> > >>> WDYT? >> > >> >> > >> 0. I'd prefer shorter names, but I don't have a strong preference for >> > >> it. Either way works. >> > > >> > > Same as Sergiu, I would prefer shorter names ; but no strong feelings >> > either. >> > > 0 >> > > >> > > Jerome >> > > >> > >> >> > >>> If you don't like this then please propose an alternative solution >> and >> > remember that we'll need to refactor commons and rendering in this case >> too. >> > >>> >> > >>> Thanks >> > >>> -Vincent >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> -- >> > >> Sergiu Dumitriu >> > >> http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> > >> devs mailing list >> > >> [email protected] >> > >> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> > >> >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > devs mailing list >> > > [email protected] >> > > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> > _______________________________________________ >> > devs mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Denis Gervalle >> SOFTEC sa - CEO >> eGuilde sarl - CTO >> _______________________________________________ >> devs mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > -- http://purl.org/net/sergiu _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
