geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Hogstrom <m...@hogstrom.org>
Subject Re: Restructuring trunk, then next steps
Date Tue, 05 Sep 2006 19:56:12 GMT
I understand your point.  I guess I'm conflicted at this point as it seems like Geronimo is
becoming 
a Maven project :-)   If the underlying tool is causing such fundamental changes to the way
the 
project is structured, named, etc. is the tool flexible enough?

I don't mean to start a rant or a huge debate as I know many people love Maven.  I'm just
commenting 
that it seems like were spending more time restructuring Geronimo around Maven than we are

developing Geronimo.  Seems a bit backwards.

Ok, flamesuit on :)

Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> The problem with not keeping the geronimo- prefix is that all jars will end
> up as
>  activemq-1.2.jar
>  activation-1.2.jar
> It will be highly confusing.
> 
> The other solution is to break the directory name = artifactId rule, which
> is imho
> a bad idea.
> 
> On 9/5/06, Matt Hogstrom <matt@hogstrom.org> wrote:
>>
>> I'm assuming everything is not geronimo- ... that might be from the
>> department of redundancy department.
>>
>> Jason Dillon wrote:
>> > So, I've mentioned a few times before that we should start thinking
>> > about how to split up modules in trunk into a few smaller chunks.  I
>> > took a few minutes and took a crude stab at what that might look like.
>> > This is just an example of how it might work... I did not do any
>> > extensive research into dependencies...
>> >
>> > Basically, I split things up into 5 main trees:
>> >
>> >  * framework - common stuff, not really the server, but supports the
>> > server, modules here should have minimal deps
>> >  * system - the major components which make up the server's system
>> > (should be the bits to start up a server shell)
>> >  * tools - bits that support the system
>> >  * plugins - components which plugin to the system
>> >  * testsuite - placeholder for modules which will be aded soon that use
>> > the itest plugin to perform integration tests
>> >
>> > I'm not sure if this is the best split, but it kinda comes closer to
>> > what I hope we can get to.  Below is how the modules that exists fit
>> > into these sections.
>> >
>> > ----
>> >
>> > framework/
>> >     geronimo-testsupport (may need to be in other tree? so can include
>> > in all modules by default)
>> >     geronimo-common
>> >     geronimo-util
>> >     geronimo-interceptor
>> >     geronimo-activation
>> >     geronimo-kernel
>> >
>> > system/
>> >     geronimo-management
>> >     geronimo-security
>> >     geronimo-security-builder
>> >     geronimo-service-builder
>> >     geronimo-core
>> >     geronimo-system
>> >     geronimo-transaction
>> >     geronimo-connector
>> >     geronimo-connector-builder
>> >     geronimo-jmx-remoting
>> >     geronimo-naming
>> >     geronimo-naming-builder
>> >     geronimo-test-ddbean (wtf is this for?)
>> >     geronimo-deployment/
>> >         geronimo-deployment (rename to -core) ?
>> >         geronimo-deploy-config
>> >         geronimo-deploy-jsr88
>> >         geronimo-deploy-tool
>> >         geronimo-hot-deploy
>> >     geronimo-client
>> >     geronimo-client-builder
>> >     geronimo-j2ee/
>> >         geronimo-j2ee
>> >         geronimo-j2ee-builder
>> >         geronimo-j2ee-schema
>> >     geronimo-web-builder
>> >
>> > plugins/
>> >     geronimo-activemq/
>> >         ge-activemq-rar (rename)
>> >         geronimo-activemq-gbean
>> >         geronimo-activemq-gbean-management
>> >     geronimo-axis
>> >     geronimo-axis-builder
>> >     geronimo-derby
>> >     geronimo-directory
>> >     geronimo-tomcat
>> >     geronimo-tomcat-builder
>> >     geronimo-jetty
>> >     geronimo-jetty-builder
>> >     geronimo-mail
>> >     geronimo-timer
>> >     geronimo-webservices
>> >
>> > tools/
>> >     geronimo-upgrade
>> >     geronimo-converter
>> >
>> > testsuite/
>> >     TODO, home for itest usage
>> >
>> > ----
>> >
>> > Anyways, I wanted to post what I am thinking.  I think that we are
>> > really close to the point where we will want to implement this sort of
>> > split up.
>> >
>> > Comments?
>> >
>> > --jason
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
> 
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message