<snip>
> > > I would also like to see a more standardised structure in
> > > turbine repository to make it look/behave a lot like some of
> > > the other apache projects. What I would like to see is a
> > > filesystem setup like
> > >
> > <snip>
> >
> > Rather than using the structure of existing Apache projects as a de-facto
> > standard, I'd much rather see an organized effort to define a true standard.
Sam
> > Ruby is headed in this direction, but I think he needs more input and/or
support
> > from other projects.
> >
> > http://oss.software.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/jakarta/nightly.html
> >
> > The problem, of course, with defining such a standard is that the core
> > developers of each project has their own preferences for setting up the
> > directory structure. Any "standard" would have to accommodate these local
> > differences if it were to succeed.
>
> I would love to get some standard happening I tried once but
> as I am effectively a nobody :P no one listened. I figure it
> would take someone who was a member of PMC to institute
> changes. Thou if you want to try and do something I will
> help you :P.
>
Well, I'm not much more than a nobody, so not very many people listen to me
either. ;-)
> I have been trying to get various people to use java/apache
> stuff for ages and this homogenisation would definetly help
> the cause :P. I already got them using Avalon and Cocoon, my
> next aim is Turbine :P
>
I think consistency across projects is the right thing to do. However, the
reality is that there isn't much of it currently. The only consistency I've
discerned is between projects setup by the same individual or organization. For
instance, the projects Jon has set up (e.g., Turbine, Velocity, Regexp) have a
similar file structure. The projects that originally came from Sun (e.g., Ant,
Tomcat) and those later created by Craig McClanahan (e.g., Catalina, Struts)
have their own, different file structure. And don't get me started on those
projects over at Apache-XML. ;-) Xerces didn't even use Ant as the primary
build tool until a few versions ago.
I honestly believe that without some sort of standards document, you will not be
able to build the required consensus. Without it, proposals to change existing
structures will invariably devolve into "discussions" of the
my-preferences-are-better-than-yours variety. (This is exactly what happens
whenever someone brings up tabs vs. spaces, indentation levels, etc.) Also,
there should be reasons for making such changes than just for the sake of
consistency; while consistency is a desired goal, it's only one among many that
require developers' time. That's why I like Sam's proposal - consistency is just
a means to an end, and it allows possibilities that just aren't possible and/or
easy right now.
I'd be willing to help with this effort, but I'm not prepared or qualified to be
the evangelist such an endeavor requires. On a more topical note, I would like
to incorporate some of your recommendations into the current build process; I
just need some more time to digest them.
> Cheers,
>
> Pete
>
--
Christopher Elkins
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
