geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Dillon <>
Subject Re: Organization and versioning of specs; a new proposal
Date Fri, 11 Aug 2006 23:05:55 GMT
I'm going to let this sit for the weekend, and if there are no  
objections I'd like to implement this.

Or do we need a formal vote to to this?


On Aug 11, 2006, at 12:44 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:

> This feels like an excellent compromise where we can easily build  
> them together and they can be independently versioned.
> -dain
> On Aug 11, 2006, at 12:15 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>> A while ago there was talks about independently versioning specs,  
>> and Alan started a reorg branch which gives each spec module its  
>> own trunk+branches+tags...
>> I have been thinking about this for a while, and with the recent  
>> desire to split off more modules from geronimo/trunk I've been  
>> pondering it even more.  What I have come to believe is that  
>> spitting up spec modules into their own trunk+branches+tags is  
>> probably not the best direction for us to head in.
>> I believe that all of our specs can, and should, share one  
>> trunk... and still have each module specify its own version.  This  
>> is very similar to how Maven2 plugins is setup, see here:
>> Each plugin has its own version that changes independently.  The  
>> top-level pom has a version too, which is independent and is only  
>> changed when there is a major configuration change in that pom.
>> I recommend that we follow this model for our specs.
>> The advantage to one trunk, is that it facilitates easy check out  
>> and building when you just want all of the specs.  If each spec  
>> was in its own trunk, you would need to svn co each one, then mvn  
>> install in each tree, which is a pain.
>> We also almost never branch specs, they just keep chugging along,  
>> only really needing tags to track released versions.
>> So, here is what I propose:
>>     specs/trunk/pom.xml
>>     specs/trunk/<artifactId>
>>     specs/tags/<artifactId>/<version>
>> And if needed:
>>     specs/branches/<artifactId>/<name>
>> This is a single trunk so to build all specs:
>>     svn co  
>> specs
>>     cd specs
>>     mvn install
>> To release an individual spec, say geronimo-spec-jms:
>>     cd specs/geronimo-spec-jms
>>     mvn release
>> The m2 release plugin can be configured with a _tag base_, which  
>> we can set to:
>> {pom.artifactId}
>> When released, the plugin will svn cp just the module's directory  
>> into a directory under tags, so it will be easy to see what the  
>> released versions of a specific spec are.
>>  * * *
>> I really do not see the need for each spec to have its own trunk,  
>> and really I think that if we did then it would just make it more  
>> difficult for cases when we really want all specs.
>> I do not see any downside to the approach above.
>> I recommend that we implement this.  The only major change, which  
>> isn't that major, is that the properties which live in the root  
>> pom that control the versions need to be removed... or rather  
>> moved back to the <version> element of the respective pom.
>> Comments?
>> --jason

View raw message