ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <nicola...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [Proposal] Krysalis Centipede, Ruper, Version to Ant
Date Thu, 06 Mar 2003 08:49:34 GMT

Conor MacNeill wrote, On 06/03/2003 4.54:
> On Thu, 6 Mar 2003 12:15 am, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> 
>>  - krysalis-centipede (the distro)   \
>>  - krysalis-cents     (the antlibs)   > Centipede
>>  - krysalis-ant-tasks (the tasks)    /
>>
>>  - krysalis-ruper     (the downloader)
>>  - krysalis-version   (versioning code)
>>
>>We have some committers that we'd propose to have access to the Ant
>>sandbox (btw, is there a CVS module for it? In this case it would not be
>>a bad thing).
> 
> At this stage, I think it is appropriate for us to look at Ruper. Centipede 
> is, at this stage, something to layer on top of Ant and should remain 
> separate, IMHO.

I agree that Centipede should remain separate and remain on top of Ant.
I also think that Centiepde can become an Ant subproject in it's own 
right, with committers that have access only to the eventual 
"ant-centiepde" module.

> Costin has volunteered to work on getting Ruper into the proposal area. Let's 
> see how that goes and then look at what other components are needed to build 
> such systems on top of Ant.

Seems fair enough. I agree that we should go as slowly as needed, by 
integrating all that makes sense in Ant, and seeing what remains, and 
deciding what is in the best interest for all of us.

>>Thoughts?
> 
> Nicola Ken, you will need to prepare the appropriate software grant doco. 

Ok, I will.

> If you think this plan is workable let's put this to a PMC vote.

Yes, let's start with Ruper, and work our way one thing at a time.

+1 :-)

-- 
Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nicolaken@apache.org
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------


Mime
View raw message