Does that mean we no longer have to copy sanbox projects to uimaj to build them? I would love that.
--Thilo On 3/8/2010 19:37, Marshall Schor wrote: > When we graduate, I think it would be a good idea to slightly > restructure our SVN layout, moving the trunk/branches/tags designation > to one level higher for the uimaj, uima-as, and sandbox projects. > > That is, the new layout would look something like: > > .../uima/trunk > /uimaj (Java SDK) > /uima-as (add-on to above > /sandbox > /superPoms <new directory to hold various parent poms> > /sharedBuildTools <or maybe a better name> > /branches > /tags > > The branches and tags can have just parts of the trunk copied to them, > or they can have the whole trunk. The Apache Release plugin works with > this structure; for instance, if you want to release just > sandbox/projectXXX the release plugin would copy sandbox/projectXXX to > the tag, not the entire trunk. (I haven't tried this, but that's the > impression I get from reading.) > > The goal of this is to allow checking out the "trunk" to check out > everything, as well as allow checking out any specific sub-part(s) of > interest (e.g., one sandbox project), and have a consistent layout in > working store that matches the SVN. This will enable a more > straight-forward build process, and allow us to use more standard Maven > tooling. > > The sharedBuildTools would be tooling (such as DocBook tools) needed for > building, but not something that is part of normal distributions or > releases. (It *could* be released, as a separate component, if that was > desired). (It can also be included in the tag - to preserve a > particular version of the tooling used to build a release). > > Any opinions pro/con moving to this kind of layout, when we move out of > the incubator? > > -Marshall > > > > > > >
