+1
What would the impact be if we renamed openjpa-all to openjpa?
We could change our checkout instructions to read
svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/openjpa/
trunkopenjpa-parent
and then the directories match the artifactId's in pom.xml.
The only reason I think this is worth doing is to avoid confusion
for new
developers down the road. It's just one more thing that we have to
remember
and explain. Maybe there's an impact to changing the directory
name that I
missed though.
-Mike
On 5/6/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
>
>
> Poking around the ActiveMQ pom.xml files, I notice that you can
have
> a different artifactId than the module name (i.e., directory)
you are
> in. I hadn't known you could do this.
>
> Currently, our artifacts name are:
>
> trunk/pom.xml: openjpa
> trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa-all
> trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: openjpa-project
>
> We could change these to:
>
> trunk/pom.xml: openjpa-parent
> trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa
> trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: apache-openjpa
>
> I've tested this out, and it results in the openjpa aggregate jar
> being named "openjpa-VERSION.jar", the dependency being simply
named
> "openjpa", and the assembly is named "apache-openjpa-VERSION.zip ".
> None of the directories needed to be renamed. I've attached the
patch
> that does this to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-194
>
> Since this will mess up people who currently have maven
dependencies
> on OpenJPA (i.e., people who depend on "openjpa-all" will now
need to
> depend on "openjpa"), we should probably get this hammered out
before
> leaving incubation. So I've gone ahead and turned the [DISCUSS]
into
> a [VOTE] to see if we should go ahead and do this.
>
> A vote of +1 means we should do the renaming, -1 means we should
not,
> and 0 means "don't care". The vote will remain open until Wednesday
> May 9th at 23:59 GMT.
>
>
>
>
> On May 4, 2007, at 6:55 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
>
> > Some comments below
> >
> > On 5/4/07, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> >>
> >> I'd like reopen the discussion on how to package and name our
> >> artifacts. I think the current setup could be improved, to
give a
> >> better experience for users who might not be using maven for
> >> dependency management. It's easy for us to change now before
> >> graduation because once we graduate, people will need to
update their
> >> dependencies anyway so there are no backward compatibility
issues.
> >>
> >> The name of the single jar that has all of the openjpa stuff
in it
> >> except for the documentation and examples is currently called
> >> openjpa-
> >> all. This name is confusing because unless they RTFM, people
don't
> >> really know that it's not all the code you need, just all the
jpa
> >> code. So I'd like to call this artifact openjpa.
> >
> >
> > +1
> >
> > But we already have a project with that name, and that project
builds
> >> the distributions. So I'd rename the current openjpa to
openjpa-dist.
> >> Its ultimate destination in the Apache mirror structure is under
> >> www.apache.org/dist/openjpa once we graduate, so having dist
in the
> >> project name helps understanding that this project builds the
> >> artifacts that go into dist. Separate from the artifacts that
are
> >> published via maven.
> >
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Finally, the openjpa-all jar includes its subcomponents as
> >> dependencies. I think this is wrong, since you end up with a
class
> >> path with openjpa-all.jar as well as openjpa-kernel.jar and
all the
> >> others.
> >
> >
> > I would like to change this too. I did a little experimenting and
> > it looks
> > like the dependencies aren't needed in openjpa-all, but they are
> > needed for
> > openjpa-project (to populate the lib directory). Moving the
> > dependencies
> > into openjpa-project should be safe.
> >
> > We're also going to need to change the deploy logic to strip
out the
> > -project suffix from the zip files. We've talked about it before
> > when I was
> > releasing 0.9.7 (and before that when Marc was working on 0.9.6),
> > but I
> > haven't had time to look into it. It should be fairly easy to
make the
> > change.
> >
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >>
> >> Craig
> >>
> >> Craig Russell
> >> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/
products/
> >> jdo
> >> 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > -Michael Dick
>
>
