Return-Path: 
 <dev-return-63417-apmail-geronimo-dev-archive=geronimo.apache.org@geronimo.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 63072 invoked from network); 20 May 2008 18:40:37 -0000
Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2)
  by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 20 May 2008 18:40:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 2293 invoked by uid 500); 20 May 2008 18:40:37 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org
Received: (qmail 2236 invoked by uid 500); 20 May 2008 18:40:37 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
list-help: <mailto:dev-help@geronimo.apache.org>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@geronimo.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@geronimo.apache.org>
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
List-Id: <dev.geronimo.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received: (qmail 2225 invoked by uid 99); 20 May 2008 18:40:37 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 20 May 2008 11:40:37 -0700
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0
	tests=SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Received: from [209.86.89.65] (HELO elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net)
 (209.86.89.65)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 20 May 2008 18:39:43 +0000
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net;
  b=ip2VBfKiV2SxxwNEonHsAZ/SSWZMvyGxvE+buI6MHrxaHuw4i9JlK9zT2SI3UKOv;
  h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Received: from [24.40.201.130] (helo=tetra.local)
	by elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67)
	(envelope-from <joe.bohn@earthlink.net>)
	id 1JyWkm-0008Bc-09
	for dev@geronimo.apache.org; Tue, 20 May 2008 14:40:04 -0400
Message-ID: <48331B03.7070008@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 14:40:03 -0400
From: Joe Bohn <joe.bohn@earthlink.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Macintosh/20080421)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r658264 - in /geronimo/samples/trunk/samples: ./
 CustomerService/ bank/ calculator-stateless-pojo/ dbtester/ inventory/
 jaxws-calculator/
 jms-mdb-sample/ ldap-sample-app/ myphonebook/ mytime/ sendmail/
 servlet-examples/
 timereport/
References: <20080520144734.E6466238896F@eris.apache.org>
 <5eb405c70805200757m36f9cc09he364bdc50489088f@mail.gmail.com>
 <40F41ED1-CC26-4187-B25A-969B9DE22C76@yahoo.com>
 <0055776B-C62B-4419-9A9B-54FB8378E60F@apache.org>
 <A0F745A9-0F14-4439-8672-0F5D62B62605@yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <A0F745A9-0F14-4439-8672-0F5D62B62605@yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ELNK-Trace: 
 c408501814fc19611aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec79a9fc2b7d5e05182b80021dcba59d5d7e350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 24.40.201.130
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

David Jencks wrote:
> 
> On May 20, 2008, at 11:27 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> The issue is how does it resolve:
>> <parent>
>> <groupId>org.apache.geronimo.samples</groupId>
>> <artifactId>samples</artifactId>
>> <version>2.2-SNAPSHOT</version>
>> </parent>
>>
>> It needs to resolve that first to resolve the apache:apache:4
>>
>> Without the snapshot repo defined, it won't resolve that.
>>
>> Dan
> 
> Good point.  So, it seems to me we have a 2-faced approach to the 
> samples.... do we want them to be individual projects or one big 
> project? I _think_ the main value of the parent pom is to define 
> dependency management.  I suggest that we either:
> 
> - figure it's one big project, and snapshot versions can only be built 
> all together (first time): we leave out the apache-snapshots and rely on 
> the on in apache v4 pom

I think we have to treat this like one big project and require an 
initial build.  There isn't much more involved than building an 
individual sample.

<soapbox>
Actually ... I think samples ought to be integrated into the server svn 
again.  I think the fact that we have never released samples 
independently and the fact that we are now 3 months past our Server 2.1 
release and we still don't have samples testify to why it isn't a good 
idea to have them split.  Also, I can think of no good reason to release 
samples independently of a server release (and again - we have never doe 
this anyway).
</soapbox>

> - figure they are individual projects, have the parent for each sample 
> be genesis project-config, and use the new import feature in maven 2.0.9 
> to get the universal dependency management section from what is now the 
> parent.  I think this will involve releasing each sample individually.

If we have to release samples individually it will never happen.

> 
> Right now I lean slightly towards the first approach.  I ___really___ 
> think we should not be duplicating information already present in parent 
> poms because we can't decide what the boundaries of an independently  
> buildable project are.
> 

I definitely think we should be taking the 1st approach.  BTW, if we 
treat them as one big project we can begin to use dependency management 
in the parent pom.  At the moment we have version dependencies spread 
across numerous samples which is really a maintenance problem (in that 
nobody is maintaining it ... another issue that could be easily solved 
if we moved the samples back into the server svn).

Joe