okay. i'm +1 for this change. i'm also +1 to call it wicket-1.3.x.
unless there's some technical reason for the name, i'd also like
to see wicket-objectssizeof-agent called wicket-object-sizeof-agent.
this would be a bit more readable and more like the other project
names.
jon
igor.vaynberg wrote:
>
> the two jdk subfolders will go away once we switch to jdk5
>
> -igor
>
>
> On 3/9/07, Jonathan Locke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> i love this. anything to make maven builds of wicket dirt simple is
>> great.
>>
>> however, i'm unsure about the impact of the jdk folders. what happens
>> when wicket-extensions and wicket-datetime get generified? do those
>> then move to the other folder? do we wind up with two wicket-extensions
>> projects over the long run or does generics backwards compat mean
>> wicket-extensions just moves to the 1.5 folder and disappears from 1.4?
>>
>>
>> Al Maw wrote:
>> >
>> > As detailed in the thread "almaw's new build-test branch" I've been
>> > thinking about how to make the release process work more smoothly.
>> >
>> > I've restructured how 1.3 is parented, etc. in the branch
>> > "al-test-wicket-1.3.x". You can see how it looks here:
>> >
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/wicket/branches/al-test-wicket-1.3.x/
>> >
>> > Advantages:
>> > - It massively simplifies the pom.xml files and reduces redundancy
>> and
>> > duplication, and removes the potential for the configuration of the
>> > various modules getting out of sync.
>> >
>> > - It's really obvious which projects need JDK 5 and which don't.
>> >
>> > - We will hopefully be able to use the Maven 2 release plug-in for
>> > the jdk-1.4 and jdk-1.5 bits and make everything more automated.
>> >
>> > - We don't need -P profile switches to build things any more.
>> >
>> > - Getting the whole shooting match into Eclipse is now:
>> > - One command to check it out.
>> > - One command to build the Eclipse .project, etc. files.
>> > - Three clicks in Eclipse to import all the projects, which will
>> > then all depend on each other correctly.
>> >
>> > - Removes the wicket-parent project, which is a bit mystical and lots
>> > of people don't discover by themselves.
>> >
>> >
>> > Disadvantages:
>> > - Everyone will need to update their workspaces.
>> >
>> >
>> > So, please vote:
>> > ================
>> >
>> > [ ] Yes, change the 1.x branch so it looks like that.
>> >
>> > [ ] No, don't restructure it! That's a rubbish idea!
>> >
>> >
>> > We could also take this opportunity to rename the 1.x branch to 1.3.x.
>> >
>> > If you voted yes above, please also vote:
>> > =========================================
>> >
>> > [ ] Yes, rename the branch to "wicket-1.3.x" at the same time so I
>> > only need to set my IDE workspace up again once.
>> >
>> > [ ] No, don't rename the branch, we'll postpone that until we
>> > release a beta, or a 1.3.0 final, or something.
>> >
>> > Given it's a bit of a faff for everyone, if this does go ahead I will
>> > post a time when I will move stuff at least a couple of days in advance
>> > so people can get their outstanding commits in, which should make it
>> > easy for everyone.
>> >
>> > If you were to have outstanding commits when things are moved, svn will
>> > keep the changes in orphaned files so you can move them across manually
>> > to the new layout. It's just a little less convenient.
>> >
>> > Al
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/VOTE%3A-Move-modules-around-to-make-releasing-easier-in-1.x-branch-%28and-rename-branch%29.-tf3375891.html#a9404299
>> Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/VOTE%3A-Move-modules-around-to-make-releasing-easier-in-1.x-branch-%28and-rename-branch%29.-tf3375891.html#a9404414
Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
