On Feb 5, 2008 7:32 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:

<snip>

> > we move the api down a level and group all mailet-related products. say:
> >
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/james/mailet/api/trunk/ (<-
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/james/mailet/trunk/)
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/james/mailet/std/trunk/
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/james/mailet/crypto/trunk/
> >
> > the website is easy enough to sort out: like common, we svn:externals
> > to create virtual modules. then we also have:
> >
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/james/mailet/current/api
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/james/mailet/current/std
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/james/mailet/current/crypto
> >
> > the mailet website can be generated from this using the reactor
> >
> > - robert
>
> Ok, this way the project can be checkedout as a multimodule product but
> our svn still contains the trunks/branches/tags for each module.

yep

> 1) We will need a pom.xml in
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/james/mailet/current/pom.xml, right?

yep

> 2) Will the mailet util library be an "util" product similar to api, std
> and crypto?

not sure we need a util library ATM. if possible, i'd prefer to
include the utils in std for now.

> I'm not sure that maven will be happy with a similar structure, but if
> we can get maven to work (build the website) and the answers to the 2
> questions above are "yes" then you convinced me and I'm fine with this
> solution :-)

it works over in the commons

- robert

Reply via email to