forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Williams <william...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] merge locationmap branch with trunk
Date Fri, 24 Jun 2005 14:17:11 GMT
On 6/24/05, Ross Gardler <rgardler@apache.org> wrote:
> Tim Williams wrote:
> > Obviously, my enthusiastic, [non-binding] +1
> > ...
> >
> >>Views
> >>-----
> >>
> >>Lots of work has been happening on views over there. These are totally
> >>optional as they are whiteboard plugins.
> >
> >
> > I think I'd take out references to Views from the fresh-site prior
> > because right now we have to locally-deploy the three view-related
> > plugins to make it work and that bit probably isn't desireable on the
> > trunk.  The Views are whiteboard but fresh-site requires them in other
> > words.
> 
> Good point, although I'm not sure this is a blocker since people working
> with SVN head should be willing to jump a few hoops, especially at the
> early stage of development. Lets see what everyone thinks about this.

I personally like a stable trunk -- builds and runs without
hoop-jumping.  If every new component added a couple more hoops to be
jumped through they'd add up quick.  Of course if it's a constant set
of hoops that can be documented then no problem.    The discussion at
the bottom of this page is about branches but I like the rules of the
"Branch-When-Needed system" as it relates to this topic.  I don't know
what the "forrest approach" is yet.
http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk/doc/user/svn-best-practices.html

> Having said that, how about this...
> 
> forrest seed            - (fresh-site site using skins)
> forrest seed_skins      - (fresh-site using skins)
> forrest seed_views      - (fresh-site using views)

I don't care for the idea of created new temporary targets so much,
assuming that 0.8 isn't shipping without views.  If 0.8 is planned to
ship with views and skins then I do like this more.  I could have a
narrow view of this but couldn't we just add a couple of commented
"project.required.plugins" lines and let folks uncomment them as they
see fit and have the lowest common denominator as the default
uncommented one?

> When we move the views plugins out of whiteboard we could change the
> default behaviour of the seed and demoSite targets to use views.

For seed I agree, I'm not familiar with the demoSite target yet.  I
wish views would ultimately end up as core forrest instead of a plugin
though personally -- making much of this ultimately a moot point.

> I think that all we need do for this is change add the views plugins to
> the forrest.properties file, is that right?

This sounds like what I'm suggesting above but I may very well be
missing the point here.

--tim

Mime
View raw message