abdera-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gav...." <brightoncomput...@brightontown.com.au>
Subject RE: Now that the code's in
Date Sat, 17 Jun 2006 13:17:22 GMT

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Duncan [mailto:stephen.duncan@gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, 17 June 2006 6:30 AM
> To: abdera-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Now that the code's in
> And the Eclipse .settings folder.  And probably .project at top level
> as well (and any sublevels it's not on...)
> -Stephen
> On 6/16/06, Stephen Duncan <stephen.duncan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Also, in each level that has a pom.xml, the target folder should be
> > added to svn:ignore.
> >
> > -Stephen
> >
> > On 6/16/06, Garrett Rooney <rooneg@electricjellyfish.net> wrote:
> > > A few little things I've noticed...
> > >
> > > There are various files in the abdera java tree that have
> > > svn:executable set on them for no discernable reason.  If someone with
> > > commit access could remove it from LICENSE and the various pom.xml
> > > files they'd earn my undying gratitude ;-)
> > >
> > > We have maven build glue in the top level of the tree, but the ant
> > > build file is down in the build subdir.  Is there a reason for that?
> > > I've got some local changes that move build.xml up into the top level
> > > directory, so you don't have to do the '-f build/build.xml' dance when
> > > you run make.  Any interest in these changes?
> > >
> > > The unit tests don't work via ant anymore, the target is commented
> > > out, and the test suite that used to be there doesn't seem to exist
> > > anymore.
> > >
> > > -garrett
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Stephen Duncan Jr
> > www.stephenduncanjr.com

Just to add my little bit,

I am a Forrest Dev (in case you wondered where I popped up from) and also
Do little bit in Lenya.

It may just be these projects, but it seems to me that the layout of the
Repository here is a little weird.

I mean, why have two trunks ? , Can the website not be part of the same
trunk, it would make for easier maintenance and deployment in the 
Future, ease of use and readability for users etc also.

Also, I don't think that anything above 'trunk' (either one) should be
Available to the general dev/user community. Not a good idea to let
Everyone loose with branches etc. 

Instructions should then be put on the website that devs/users can download
The latest SVN from 'Trunk', not root. 

New users might like to see 

'svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/abdera/ > abdera' as it is
Currently on the website so they don't have to run off and find the
appropriate command. If it were reorganised into one trunk this would be

'svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/abdera/trunk > abdera'
And would contain both the java and site trees in one, but all branches
And other unneeded files/directories would be ignored and reserved for
Only committer use. Otherwise I reckon 'svn revert' will become someones
Best friend.

The snell_sandbox, is this for everyone to play with ? If so an idea
I bring from Forrest etc is the Whiteboard, call it the Sandbox if you
Like, but is housed not in a branch, but as a sub-dir of trunk, that
Way everyone gets to play, add there own whiteboard/sandbox sub-projects.
Eventually they either get deleted or merged into the core, or a plugin,

Just some observations that may or may not fit in with the needs of this


View raw message