fineract-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Keith Woodlock <keithwoodl...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [MENTORS] multiple repos for one Apache Product?
Date Wed, 25 May 2016 08:37:28 GMT
Myrle, Markus,

For lots of reasons it would make sense for the Fineract Platform to be one
project (on apache and github).

If the main driver for saying service-per-repository is about putting in a
physical barrier to stop developers leaking code or abstractions into one
another then I think having just one code repository / project is fine and
you need to split the 'Fineract Platform' into a number of sub-projects
(folders) for each service.

A quick example of that type of setup would be:
https://github.com/ewolff/microservice, the microservice-demo folder is
split into the various services that compose it etc

regards,
Keith.

On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Ross Gardler <Ross.Gardler@microsoft.com>
wrote:

> At Apache we don't like umbrella projects - that is projects that can
> stand on their own as separate projects being gathered together under
> one-uber project. This tends to be damaging for community development.
> However, there is nothing wrong with one project having multiple "services"
> each represented as a separate project within a parent PMC when those
> services are not useful projects outside of Fineract itself.
>
> Another warning sign is if the services start to build their own
> governance structure within the parent project. Merit earned on one part of
> a Top Level Project gives equal authority over all other parts. Now you may
> have social policies that say "don't touch code you don't understand" but
> you can't have byelaws that prevent it. If it is necessary to separate your
> community in this way then you probably need to have multiple TLPs.
>
> So the answer is "it depends ;-)
>
> Ross
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Markus GeiƟ [mailto:markus.geiss@live.de]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 12:29 AM
> > To: dev@fineract.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: [MENTORS] multiple repos for one Apache Product?
> >
> > ----------------------------------------
> > > Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 20:33:06 -0700
> > > Subject: Re: [MENTORS] multiple repos for one Apache Product?
> > > From: roman@shaposhnik.org
> > > To: dev@fineract.incubator.apache.org
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 5:27 AM, Myrle Krantz <mkrantz@mifos.org>
> > wrote:
> > >> Hi Mentors,
> > >>
> > >> I asked this question in the thread on microservices, but the e-mail
> > >> was long and most of the content was not relevant for you guys so you
> > >> may have missed it:
> > >>
> > >> As far as I can tell the current mode of operation at Apache is one
> > >> repository to one product. I would prefer to work with one repository
> > >> per service. I believe that would help programmers remain strict
> > >> about division of labor between the services, and think more
> > >> carefully about interface breaking changes. Is there any reason a
> > >> product can't have multiple repositories?
> > >
> > > Multiple repos are, of course, permissible. However, the question you
> > > should be asking your self are more along the lines of how much of a
> > > de-couple release policy AND community participation do you want to
> > > have between these projects. Because the thing is, if your repos are
> > > independent enough wrt. release schedules AND independent enough
> > > regarding who commits to them ASF will be asking a question of breaking
> > you into a set of projects.
> > >
> > > Does this answer you question?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Roman.
> >
> > Hey Roman,
> >
> > thanks for the answer. ; o)
> >
> > To provide a little more context. We are currently working on a
> per-service
> > repository approach to reduce unwanted cross service usage of internal
> classes
> > and implementations.
> >
> > Every business domain will become a micro service and a single
> repository with
> > multiple modules.
> >
> > Do you think this approach would lead to get asked by ASF to break into
> > multiple projects? It wouldn't be that bad if we'd treat these as
> sub-project of
> > Fineract as the TLP umbrella for them.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Markus
> >
> > .::YAGNI likes a DRY KISS::.
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message