geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Dillon <>
Subject Re: Restructuring trunk, then next steps
Date Fri, 01 Sep 2006 19:59:28 GMT
On Aug 31, 2006, at 1:31 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
> Ok ... take a deep breath.
> This proposal was *not* just to work around windows.  It was to  
> offer what I thought were constructive ideas and avoid exasperating  
> a known problem unnecessarily.

Yes, I understand.

> I understand your hesitation to bundle the builders and deployers  
> together (which is why I had a note there).  What do you think  
> about the rest of the proposal?
> -  Type based groupings in addition to functional groupings.
> -  One level deep.  While I love hierarchy, I think it's overkill  
> here.
> -  Elimination of redundancy in names as much as possible.  (BTW, I  
> know your post was a "crude stab" so I thought this was the type of  
> input you were requesting to refine it).

Yup, that is what we need to do... keep refining until its not  
crude... then make a plan for how to do it.

I got side tracked by the evil windows sub-context :-P

> -  "server" in place of "system"
> -  "features" in place of "plugins"
> -  Consistent naming of artifacts when the type is included in the  
> name (such as with builder and deployer).

Fine with me.


View raw message