we have recently been doing a lot of work with the dlm processing
pipeline to reproduce the functionality that we were able to accomplish
with minor tweaks to alm. so, we will be looking to stay involved in
the alm to dlm talks. in fact, i don't know the best way to facilitate
increased discussion and comparison of notes, but it should happen
sooner rather than later.
i have to say... i am completely sold on dlm, and a SUPER KUDOS to mark
boyd for making this such a solid, robust, and flexible product.
Andrew Petro wrote:
"contrib" ?
+1 on moving ALM out of the core uPortal SVN deliverable
+1 for finding someplace more articulate than "sandbox" for it to live
+1 for really, seriously, figuring out whether anyone cares about ALM
in uPortal 3...
... and whether those someones are interested in going after
opportunities like Drew Wills' sleek automated ALM-->DLM upgrade and
enhancing DLM (perhaps via adoption of the Mark Boyd code in Sandbox)
to meet their needs. Now that we've got a uPortal Steering Committee,
I thnk this is a job for that committee, to engage with Unicon to
understand the prognosis on the Academus --> Open Source uPortal using
ALM with Open Source Plugins --> Open Source uPortal using DLM with
Open Source Plugins upgrade path, to engage with ESUP-Portail to
understand the prognosis for the "ESUP Distribution Uses DLM" idea.
I've added this to the agenda for the steering committee bootstrapping
conference call
<http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/UPC/Steering+Committee>.
Andrew
+1 on removing it.
+1 on bill's comments.
based on some previous threads, it almost seems like we need an
additional svn space outside of the sandbox that is more like a
uportal framework plug-ins or add-ons space.
William G. Thompson, Jr. wrote:
I think the approach is a good one, although I wonder if it would keep
these a bit clearer to put the ALM code into module tree distinct from
sandbox so as to keep the meaning of the sandbox "experimental, not in
production, code base" clear.
On 9/28/07, Eric Dalquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In the code cleanup effort outlined for the uP3 community roadmap I've
been removing chunks of deprecated code where prudent and doing other
minor tweaking. Some that was talked about in-depth at the conference
but not as much on this list is what to do with the ALM code. The
plan I
had worked out with several folks was to pull the ALM/integrated modes
code out into a sandboxed project in SVN.
The goal of this is that we do not want new installs using ALM and we
don't have plans to continue to maintain that code. That said
moving the
code into the sandbox allows someone else to step up at a later
date and
apply ALM patches and actually use the code in uPortal 3. The
sandboxed
project is designed to be an overlay of the uPortal 3 code, if
there is
interest in actually making sure that overlay is functional as we move
forward I'm sure we could tweak the Maven build for the ALM project to
automate that processes.
These changes have already been made but it doesn't me they can't be
rolled back or have a different strategy taken.
-Eric
ALM Move: http://www.ja-sig.org/issues/browse/UP-1835
Code Cleanup: http://www.ja-sig.org/issues/browse/UP-1832
--
You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see
http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
--
You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see
http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
