I agree on mime4j, server, jsieve, postage, jspf needing a ttb structure
as they follow totally separate workflows, they use different build
mechanisms and they are standalone libraries/products.
I think Robert proposed to change only the server folder to split its
content into multiple subprojects.
The current move from trunk to trunk/phoenix-deployment (if I understood
him correctly) is only a temporary move: in the end we'll have something
similar to:
jspf/trunk
mime4j/trunk
server/trunk/build.xml (to build server and all its modules)
server/trunk/phoenix-deployment
server/trunk/pop3server
server/trunk/smtpserver
server/trunk/mailrepository
server/trunk/fetchmail
server/trunk/spoolmanager
This is only a subset of a possible final solution. In the old threads
you can find a list of modules we discussed about.
Robert probably made a copy&paste to wiki:
http://wiki.apache.org/james/Development/Modularisation#head-6070ae830fffd3aa5273d9b50262e904a72f2721
Stefano
Noel J. Bergman ha scritto:
Stefano Bagnara wrote:
Noel J. Bergman ha scritto:
robert burrell donkin wrote:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/james/server/trunk/ has been moved to
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/james/server/trunk/pheonix-deployment/
HUH?! If it is trunk it should be called trunk. If it is some branch it
does NOT belong under trunk. The SVN conventions are trunk, tags and
branches. trunk is just that, and nothing else.
I think that this is almost standard for multimodule/granular projects.
This is a list of ASF projects I know follows the same approach:
activemq, cayenne, cocoon, apacheds, geronimo, mina, maven-archiva,
continuum, maven-components, jackrabbit...
I'd have to review each to see what each is actually doing. A various
points in time, some projects had totally screwed up SVN structure. But to
focus on the real issue ...
Are you proposing to have a trunk/branches/tags structure for each
submodule? I'm against this, but I'm open to discussion or to a vote.
It is very simple. If something is a separately releasable/versionable
component, it gets a {ttb} structure. Else it does not.
Having something like:
trunk/
mime4j/
server/
jsieve/
...
is the WRONG approach. The right approach is what we are supposed to have:
mime4/{ttb}
server/{ttb}
jsieve/{ttb}
...
My objection is that Robert introduced a level under trunk and at least
temporarily required that people switch to checking out that new level as
trunk.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
