Dan
While it would easiest to keep trunk where is all the code is actually
related, so tagging and branching would be all over the place. I would
prefer a structure more like:-
trunk/
framework/
pom.xml
core/...
...
examples/
... [A]
domain-libs/
... [B]
tags/
whole project tag
...
framework/
framework tag
...
examples/
example tag
...
domain-libs/
domain libs tag
...
branches/
whole project branch
...
framework/
framework branch
...
examples/
example branch
...
domain-libs/
domain libs branch
...
Regards
Rob
On 25/06/11 08:40, Dan Haywood wrote:
Hi all,
As you probably saw, the vote for 0.1.2-RC4-incubating didn't get
through, the main reason that some people voted on one version of
source-release (the one I manually uploaded from my target directory
to my home address), and others voted on the one that mvn
automatically uploaded to the staging repo. That fact invalidates the
vote. I'll update the release process in the contributors guide so
that in future we only call a vote on the one uploaded to the staging
repo (which for various boring reasons would also seem to be better,
ie have less/no spurious artifacts in it).
Anyway... since we need to go round the loop yet again, it seems that
I may as well address some minor issues that - while not showstoppers
- could be tidied up.
One of these is arranging things so that the examples and domain-libs
modules, which are not part of the main modules, don't get zipped up
into the source release. To address this, I think it means we need to
move them out of trunk.
What I propose is to go from:
trunk/
pom.xml
core/...
...
examples/... [A]
domain-libs/... [B]
tags/
branches/
to:
trunk/
pom.xml
core/...
...
tags/
branches/
examples/trunk/
... [A]
domain-libs/trunk/
... [B]
I realize this isn't quite symmetrical, but I think I'd like to have
"trunk" where it is (ie
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/isis/trunk rather than
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/isis/framework/trunk or
some such).
If anyone has any objections, let me know. I'll not do anything for
the next 72 hours or so, to give everyone chance to read this and
respond (ie 72 hour lazy consensus).
Thanks
Dan
