geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeremy Boynes <>
Subject Re: Module restructure
Date Fri, 27 May 2005 23:25:43 GMT
Bruce Snyder wrote:
> On 5/27/05, Jeremy Boynes <> wrote:
>>One of the reasons for going with a modular structure in the first place
>>was to make the totality more manageable while still being able to
>>develop each module. For small projects I would agree it is probably not
>>worth it, but most large distributed projects have gone that way: look
>>at HTTPD + mod_*, Tomcat + commons-*, Maven + plugins, Eclipse +
>>plugins, ...
>>The community is asking for subsets of functionality - we should use the
>>module structure to give it to them rather than waiting for a release at
>>the global level (especially with the overhead of certification testing).
> Are you now talking about what should be distributed to users as
> opposed to the dir structure of the SVN repo? Or are you talking about
> the two as one in the same (i.e. certain subsets of the project should
> be reflected in the SVN repo dir structure, not hidden in the build
> scripts)?

The two are related as we are already generating artifact jars for each 
of the modules that fit the functions that people are asking for (e.g. 
transaction, connector). All I am really saying is that we should have 
stable/unstable versions at the module level so that they know which 
ones are safe to use. The structure I proposed does this but also allows 
someone to easily check out and build an entire stable or unstable tree.

This also applies to us - for example, transaction is not changing so 
rather than build from a SNAPSHOT all the time we could use a known 
version. This would cut the build time too :-)


View raw message