i still have 2 patches waiting in the bugzilla , 31196 & 31265 , can anybody have a look at it before changing the structure ?
restructuration of the cvs would be great - and that also would be very nice to use maven to make the builds, as it completely clarifies dependencies with other modules, that is very helpful when integrating in other projects, and it gives a "standard" file organization for all the project files. maven is replacing ant in more and more projects and i believe that would be the good time to integrate it into slide, what do you think ?
thomas
Le 18 oct. 04, � 09:24, Oliver Zeigermann a �crit :
+1 to all this.
I think we could begin restructuring the CVS HEAD soon - just make sure everyone committed their patches before - and have it avaiable for general release in 2.2
Oliver
James Mason schrieb:
Big +1 from me. Your thread in the PMC actually got me thinking along
similar lines. I'd like to take it a little further than just separate
release cycles, though.
Currently the Slide project is structured something like:
+- Slide Server
\
+- Slide Client
+- Proposals
+- Everything else (etc)
which means everything is effectively a child of the server. I'd like to
make the Server a sibling of everything else rather than being the
parent. I think this better reflects the current state of the project,
gives more prominence to the other components, and will make builds
easier to manage.
I'd like to see this structure reflected in both cvs and the
documentation/website. I think the former will make builds/release
easier and the latter will make it easier for people to find what
they're looking for (as well as giving more prominence to the other
components).
I think this kind of separation would also provide a good gauge of
whether Slide could stand on its own as a TLP. At this point I don't
think we could (nor do we need to), but if we can organize the
complexity we currently have and make it clear how current and future
components fit under the Slide umbrella I think we'll be mostly ready
if/when there is enough external interest in Slide to warrant a TLP.
-James
On Sun, 2004-10-17 at 22:35, Oliver Zeigermann wrote:Folks,
Slide has become a large project with lots of components.
After some experience with the testsuite which until 2.1b2 has not been released at all and the projector which did not make it into the 2.1b2, but seems to be almost ready for prime time, it might be a good idea to release at least these components in a decoupled release process:
- projector: WebDAV workflow and rendering
- testsuite: most complete WebDAV testsuite
- wck: simple WebDAV enabling kit for enterprise / business systems of all kinds
- WebDAV client library (maybe along with ant tasks and connector)
- WebDAV command line cient
I only recently understood this is possible without any problem and would make the release cycle - which is HUGE for Slide because of its complexity - much shorter. We still could have a general and a bundled release once in a while. But projector could release earlier than the general Slide 2.2 which can not be expected before 2005. Same thing with WCK, it is at least ready for a beta, but of course can not be part of the 2.1 release, so it would have to wait until 2005 as well. I have big expectations in WCK concerning a boost in publicity for Slide...
Additionally, the server and client parts may have different development speeds, and might be release asynchronously, which is fine as they communicate over WebDAV (2.1 has been an exception as new methods have been added).
We would need additional release managers for each component then. This could all be James, but that would be unfair I guess. So, I would propose Daniel for the projector, Stefan for the testsuite, myself for wck, and Ingo for the client parts. James would remain to be the general release manager.
Of course all this would be on a volunteer base and if there is no release manager for each sub component obviously there is no interest for a dedicated release. For now I can only signal my willingness to do this for WCK. I am pretty sure Daniel would for projector.
Comments? Does this make sense? Do you people want this as well?
Oliver
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
