The LICENCE and NOTICE files in the new repo will need updating. I also wondered if the qpid-jms-amqp-0-x-test-utils utils module could just be factored out? It doesnt seem like its going to be adding significant value in the new repo to warrant the new module.
I also wondered about the plan for completing the clients new repo/area in terms of things like: git mirror, GitHub mirror, GitHub integrations, Travis/Appveyor CI builds? I ask as it occurs to me that now would be the next best time to move the repo to Git, before that work is done, as it would be less work overall for us and infra, cause less disruption for everyone over time, and give us a better result now. As I understand things from prior moves, doing so necessitates infra recreate the Git and GitHub mirrors (plus redo all the integrations), which in case of the latter also breaks existing forks off on their own. Given this isnt the first time some of this stuff has moved it would seem nice not to have to distrupt things yet again later and get such changes out the way now. Benefits would be avoiding creating repeated work (mainly for infra, but us too), reducing hassle for devs/'users', doing away with the annoying sync delays of the current multi-hop system (it took 32 minutes for the most recent commit to sync end to end and close its related GitHub PR), and being consistent within the project. Robbie On 7 February 2017 at 20:44, Keith W <[email protected]> wrote: > I made an initial commit on QPID-7622 separating Qpid Broker for Java > from the Qpid JMS 0-x Client. The client now lives at > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/qpid/qpid-jms-amqp-0-x. More commits > will follow over the next few days to eliminate the client-only code > from the broker. There are also a few refactorings needed in the > Broker before the 0-8 and 0-10 protocol code can be moved to their > respective plugin modules. > > I have refactored Jenkins to take account of the changes and will be > monitoring it for the next few days. > > Moving the Broker to JDK 1.8 will take place soon once the dust has > settled, under a separate JIRA. > > > > > On 12 January 2017 at 18:13, Keith W <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> So, for the moment, I suggest these components remain SVN in the following >>>> way: >>>> >>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/qpid/java/ - will continue to house >>>> everything it houses today (Broker, Integration Tests etc) except for >>>> 0-x client and 0-x client docs. >>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/qpid/qpid-jms-client-amqp-0-x - a >>>> new repository created for the rehired 0-x client. The Maven >>>> artefact name will remain unchanged (qpid-client) >>> >>> I'd be fine with that (maybe drop 'client' from the 'repo' name to >>> align, and avoid containing the other clients artifact name). >> >> I'm happy with the suggestion to drop the 'client' part. So, that would give >> us: >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/qpid/qpid-jms-amqp-0-x >> >> >>> That >>> said, having made the transition a few times now its worth saying its >>> not that much effort normally, especially compared to the rest of the >>> change here. In some ways I think making the changes would be less >>> painful if done while/after moving to git, and similarly for any >>> ongoing backporting efforts. It is a while since a move was deferred >>> for the last reorg :) >> >> I think I'd prefer to do the tree surgery in svn. I'm hoping (unless >> there are more comments on this thread) this work can be done next >> week. >> Once the new structure is settled down. I'll look to schedule the move >> to git as soon as we can. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
