geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Blevins <david.blev...@visi.com>
Subject Re: Trunk cleanup?
Date Tue, 20 Sep 2005 18:02:28 GMT
I'd also like to move the maven-geronimo-plugin (aka, geronimo- 
deployment-plugin).  I can't see any reason we should keep releasing  
it with every geronimo version.

-David

On Sep 20, 2005, at 10:28 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:

> The recent emails got me thinking about cleaning up the trunk  
> tree.  After about 20 minutes of investigations (so take it for  
> what it is worth :)  I came up with the following proposal:
>
>
> Sandbox - I think this should be moved to the root of the tree and  
> be a place where any committer can play or experiment freely.  The  
> contrib directory in the sandbox seems like it was created as an  
> initial home for the initial import new contributions (i.e., a tag  
> of the initial import).  I like this idea and think we should move  
> contrib to root and attempt to back fill the big initial imports  
> like the console and the eclipse plugin.  The other sandbox  
> directory I have questions on it petstore.  If it works, I think we  
> should move it to an examples directory off of root.
> geronimo/trunk/sandbox                  --> geronimo/sandbox
> geronimo/trunk/sandbox/contrib          --> geronimo/contrib
> geronimo/trunk/sandbox/mail             --> geronimo/sandbox/mail
> geronimo/trunk/sandbox/petstore         --> geronimo/examples/petstore
> geronimo/trunk/sandbox/spring-assembly  --> geronimo/sandbox/spring- 
> assembly
>
>
> Specs - I think we are ready to split this off into an  
> independently released and tightly managed subproject.
> geronimo/trunk/specs  -->  geronimo/specs
>
>
> Console - Aaron correct me if I'm wrong... I assume that the  
> console is tied to the version of the Geronimo server it is  
> included with, so it would be unreasonable to ship it separately.   
> Therefore, I think we should make move it to the root of trunk
> geronimo/trunk/applications/console-core       --> geronimo/trunk/ 
> console/core
> geronimo/trunk/applications/console-ear        --> geronimo/trunk/ 
> console/ear
> geronimo/trunk/applications/console-framework  --> geronimo/trunk/ 
> console/framework
> geronimo/trunk/applications/console-standard   --> geronimo/trunk/ 
> console/standard
>
>
> Applications - I think these we need to discuss more, but I have a  
> few suggestions.  Some of these are examples, and some look like  
> real applications.  Here is my best guess at how they break down:
> geronimo/trunk/applications/demo         --> geronimo/examples/ 
> SomeMoreInformativeName
> geronimo/trunk/applications/jmxdebug     --> geronimo/sandbox/ 
> jmxdebug  (I think this need more work or we should simply drop it)
> geronimo/trunk/applications/magicGball   --> geronimo/examples/ 
> magicGball
> geronimo/trunk/applications/uddi-server  --> geronimo/applications/ 
> uddi-server
> geronimo/trunk/applications/welcome      --> geronimo/trunk/ 
> welcome  (not sure... is this the tomcat/jetty welcome app?)
>
>
> In general we end up with the following structure:
> geronimo/trunk - Stuff needed for the J2EE server
> geronimo/specs - Specification API implementations
> geronimo/trunk/console - The J2ee web admin console
> geronimo/sandbox - Play area
> geronimo/contrib - Tags of the initial import from a donation
> geronimo/examples - Example apps for new users
> geronimo/applications - Standalone applications such as dayTrader  
> and uddi-server
>
> This is just my opinion....
>
> -dain
>
>
>
>
>
>


Mime
View raw message