geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Trunk cleanup?
Date Tue, 20 Sep 2005 17:42:39 GMT
I think we're losing the svn meaning of trunk/branches.  I think we 
either need to keep stuff under trunk or for each subproject have

geronimo/contrib/trunk
geronimo/examples/trunk
geronimo/specs/trunk
geronimo/devtools/trunk

etc.

for some thinks such as sandbox trunk may not seem to make much sense 
but I think we should keep it anyway for consistent structure.

I also think we should make an apache-wide specs top level project, but 
I don't have the oomph to approach everyone needed to make it happen.

thanks
david jencks

On Sep 20, 2005, at 1:28 PM, 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