geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <>
Subject Re: Module restructure
Date Fri, 27 May 2005 16:27:30 GMT
BTW, however we resolve stable and unstable, I really do like the  
idea of a separate sandbox tree. That will make things very clear to  


On May 27, 2005, at 12:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:

> Clearly, we need something like this to get organized around the  
> final push for certification and the 1.0 release, by why not just  
> branch for the stable, and head is unstable?
> geir
> On May 27, 2005, at 12:07 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
>> Stefan brings up the question of whether we want to release sub- 
>> modules of Geronimo separately. I think this is a good idea and  
>> would propose the following restructure of the tree to move in  
>> this direction.
>> Rather than "trunk" in the root, we have three separate trees:
>> stable    similar to even-numbered versions of Linux, this tree
>>           would contain stable code intended for production use
>>           and operates with a focus on stability (i.e. well
>>           documented stable APIs, backward compatibility, no
>>           SNAPSHOT dependencies etc.)
>>           There will be multiple branches as needed.
>> unstable  similar to odd-numbered versions this is where new
>>           development is done and APIs etc. are much more
>>           likely to change. We may still do releases from here
>>           but they are quite likely to be incompatible; it may
>>           be all we package from here are nightlies.
>> sandbox   as now, a free-for-all area for trying out new ideas
>>           and experimenting with new technologies
>> Given the size of the codebase, we need to preserve the module  
>> structure that we have in the current trunk. However, even now  
>> some modules are more stable than others (e.g. the transaction and  
>> connector ones Thierry is looking to use) and I think are in a  
>> position where they can be versioned separately.
>> With the structure above in place, we can move modules into the  
>> stable or unstable trees as appropriate. For those that we  
>> consider stable (e.g. transaction) we can cut numbered releases  
>> that people can use standalone.
>> This will also speed the unstable build as we won't need to check  
>> SNAPSHOTs for everything all the time.
>> I would suggest we start on this as part of packaging for M4 and  
>> would be willing to co-ordinate.
>> --
>> Jeremy
> -- 
> Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437

Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437

View raw message