geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From siss...@insession.com
Subject Re: Spring cleaning
Date Sun, 10 Apr 2005 11:35:03 GMT
A cleanup of 
http://www.apache.org/dist/java-repository/geronimo-spec/jars/ ? 

For example, is geronimo-spec-ejb-1.0-M1.jar really the EJB 1.0 spec or is 
it before our versioning scheme was sorted out.  If it really is 1.0 then 
how does one easily find the source for it?

What is the retention policy for release candidate JARs in the repository 
once we go to a formal release?

John

This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential, 
proprietary or non-public information.  This information is intended 
solely for the designated recipient(s).  If an addressing or transmission 
error has misdirected this e-mail, please notify the sender immediately 
and destroy this e-mail.  Any review, dissemination, use or reliance upon 
this information by unintended recipients is prohibited.  Any opinions 
expressed in this e-mail are those of the author personally.

Jeremy Boynes <jboynes@apache.org> wrote on 09/04/2005 01:34:30 AM:

> It has been a very long time since we went around and cleaned up some of 

> the things that seemed like good ideas at the time. I would like to 
> propose a spring-cleaning exercise.
> 
> For example, if we look in the sandbox we moved a lot of things there 
> over a year ago on the basis that they might be useful later; this 
> includes mail, remoting and explorer which have all been implemented 
> differently in the trunk. I would suggest we remove everything from 
> there except Gianny's webdav stuff (unless he thinks that should go 
too).
> 
> There is also some utility stuff in the common, core and system modules 
> that is not being used and which can be removed to reduce clutter and 
> footprint.
> 
> Finally, I'd like to revisit the dependencies we have. For example, I 
> recently came across the case where we were using a RC version of the 
> velocity jellybean but then they had cut the final release and we just 
> had not upgraded. We should go back and see if there are more instances 
> of this. We may also find that by removing some of the clutter some 
> dependencies can also be removed entirely.
> 
> Any thoughts, objections, or additional stuff that could be cleaned up?
> 
> --
> Jeremy


Mime
View raw message