felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Francesco Furfari <francesco.furf...@isti.cnr.it>
Subject Re: Repository/package structure
Date Thu, 01 Dec 2005 15:56:41 GMT
It's ok for me, we have a similar structure.
What for the test cases? do we put all inside the subprojects? 
org.apache.felix.upnp.test?

francesco


Richard S. Hall ha scritto:

> Hello,
>
> It seems that we have a few contributions nearly ready for the 
> repository. It might be worthwhile if we talk about repository and 
> package structure, since this issue will come up as soon as everything 
> is in order for the code contributions.
>
> We sort of had this discussion earlier, but it is not clear to me that 
> we came away with a final consensus. I think we just said we will 
> defer until we need to do something...well, now we need to do 
> something. :-)
>
> I propose that the trunk directory contain a directory for each 
> subproject, where the subproject directory name is the package name of 
> the root package of the subproject. Taking the framework as an example:
>
>    trunk/
>       org.apache.felix.framework/
>
> Of course, for the framework we will need to move some other things 
> around since it currently contains some bundles, so we might end up with:
>
>    trunk/
>       org.apache.felix.framework/
>       org.apache.felix.shell/
>       org.apache.felix.shell.tui/
>       org.apache.felix.bundlerepository/
>
> The shell and bundlerepository subprojects include default 
> implementations that could be moved up to top-level subprojects if 
> deemed necessary in the future, such as if we eventually have multiple 
> implementations available of our own services.
>
> For our outstanding contributions (i.e., UPnP, HTTP Service, and 
> Preferences Service) , I propose the following:
>
>    trunk/
>       org.apache.felix.http.jetty/
>       org.apache.felix.prefs.jndi/
>       org.apache.felix.upnp/
>
> The first two allow for other service implementations (e.g., HTTP 
> based on Tomcat or Prefs based on files). For UPnP, it seems to me 
> that multiple implementations are less likely, so I didn't propose any 
> sub-package...UPnP implementation packages could be renamed later if 
> another implementation comes along.
>
> I assume that we will get a Log Service before long, so that will 
> likely be something like:
>
>    trunk/
>       org.apache.felix.log.simple/
>       org.apache.felix.log.postgres/
>
> Summarizing, we end up with the trunk/ directory being a flat list of 
> subprojects named after their package.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -> richard
>


Mime
View raw message