directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Chris Custine" <chris.cust...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Policy for Managing TLP POM
Date Wed, 23 May 2007 16:30:24 GMT
You know what? Disregard my last email.  I wasn't thinking about this
properly.  I understand what you are saying now (don't ask me why I didn't
get it 5 minutes ago).  In fact, I agree with you 100%.

Two things...
1).  Not sure I understand what rule #3 is about.
2).  In this scenario, the maven guys also recommend just using an
incremented counter for the parent pom version, like 1,2,3,4,5 instead of
1.0, 1.2, 2.0, etc.  I guess this is basically because there is no artifact
produced so the versioning should be as simple as possible.  Just passing
that along...

And now that I have my head on straight...  my first vote.  ;-)

[x] +1 Apply this policy/process for TLP POM management


On 5/23/07, Chris Custine <chris.custine@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I fall into the "dazed and confused" camp at the moment so I need to do
> some more reading to fully understand.  One part in particular that I don't
> understand is this line:
>
> "This causes it's misuse to facilitate building ApacheDS and all it's
> dependencies in one big build. This must stop because this usage makes it
> inconvenient to use for building other projects like Triplesec and LDAP
> Studio once it moves to Maven."
>
> I actually LIKE it this way  :-)  I don't think this actually causes any
> harm anyway, because if you build a project that references this pom as a
> parent, the modules section is ignored IIRC.  Are you talking about some
> other issue with the parent pom?
>
> These maven setups are definitely a complex issue so I find myself wanting
> to take a cautious approach...
>
> Chris
>
> On 5/22/07, Alex Karasulu <akarasulu@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I compiled some documentation talking about how we should handle a
> > parent POM for our TLP
> > so all subprojects can inherit from it.  We have been using it
> > incorrectly and have been loosing
> > track of it. I explain all this and expose some simple policy (6 rules)
> > that will help us keep this
> > all straight [1].
> >
> > Please read this and let's vote on it make it official.
> >
> > [  ] +1 Apply this policy/process for TLP POM management
> > [  ] +/-0 Abstain - don't understand or don't care
> > [  ] -1 Do *NOT* apply this policy for TLP POM management
> >
> > -- Alex
> >
> > -------
> > [1] - http://cwiki.apache.org/DIRxDEV/top-level-pom-management-policy.html
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Mime
View raw message