geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Hogstrom <>
Subject Re: Independently version transaction and connector
Date Thu, 10 Aug 2006 20:57:20 GMT
This is what I meant by "top-level"

Something like:


Then have branch, tags and trunk under them.  I think this makes a lot of sense.

Jason Dillon wrote:
> Before we start moving components into separate trees, I hope we can 
> think ahead a bit and consider a plan for how to organize chunks of 
> components into a small set of trees.  I think that if we just pluck 
> them off one by one as peers to trunk that we will end up with a messy 
> svn repo.  I'd like to see those components organized into categories 
> within our repo.
> I'd also like to eventually do away with the top-level /trunk, /tags and 
> /branches... and instead move that into a top-level tree... very similar 
> to how the maven repo is:
> --jason
> On Aug 10, 2006, at 6:42 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>> I can see the difficulty pointed out by Jason and the benefit raised 
>> by Dain.  I've never liked versioning parts of Geronimo that rarely 
>> change and am all for making things more consumable externally.
>> The proposal as it stands is fairly generic.  Is the idea to relocate 
>> Tx Manager and Connector to be top-level projects withing Geronimo and 
>> build separately or some kind of hybrid in the current tree.  If we 
>> are going to release them independently then I think they should be 
>> top-level in Geronimo (and I know thats a lot more work).
>> Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>>> What do everyone think about changing the transaction and connector 
>>> modules to be versioned independently of the main Geronimo server?
>>> -dain

View raw message