geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Donald Woods <dwo...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Proposed tranql svn reorganization
Date Tue, 22 Sep 2009 16:44:22 GMT
Flat structure like spec sounds good.

Would there also be a common tranql-parent POM, or would they all use 
genesis?


-Donald


David Jencks wrote:
> 
> On Sep 21, 2009, at 8:39 PM, Rex Wang wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> 2009/9/22 Jack Cai <greensight@gmail.com <mailto:greensight@gmail.com>>
>>
>>     I think it's a good idea. A small problem that I see is currently
>>     all the vendor connectors have different version numbers. If we
>>     are going to put them under the same folder, shall we bump them to
>>     the same version?
>>
>> So, if I update one vendor and change its version, I should update all 
>> the vendors' version?
> 
> Since the vendor wrappers are not built together, there is no need for 
> them to have the same version.
> 
> I was actually thinking further of:
> - combining connector and connector-ra into a folder, perhaps "generic"
> - removing the "vendors" folder and having generic, derby, db2, 
> postgres,.... next to one another.
> 
> But even if we keep the vendors folder the versions don't have to be 
> related.
> 
> thanks
> david jencks
> 
>>
>> -Rex
>>
>>
>>     -Jack
>>
>>
>>     On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 4:41 AM, David Jencks
>>     <david_jencks@yahoo.com <mailto:david_jencks@yahoo.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         I've been irked for a while with the tranql svn organization
>>         and just bit myself by not being careful enough to check the
>>         extent of the changes IDEA made.  I'd like to reorganize svn
>>         to make life clearer and simpler.
>>
>>         1. There are basically 2 projects, the query language itself
>>         which is not really under active development at the moment,
>>         and the j2ca connector framework which occasionally gets
>>         tweaked.  I'd like to separate them.
>>
>>         2. We have a lot of foo/bar/trunk type directories.  Our
>>         experience in the geronimo specs projects is that maven 2 has
>>         no problem with separately versioned subprojects all under trunk.
>>
>>         So, I'd like to propose
>>
>>         ql/
>>         +/branches
>>         +/tags
>>         +/trunk
>>
>>         ra/
>>         +/branches
>>         +/tags
>>         +/trunk
>>
>>
>>         Under ra/trunk we'd have connector, connector-ra, and the
>>         individual vendor directories such as derby, oracle, etc.
>>
>>         Thoughts?  In particular does anyone think moving the existing
>>         tags will cause problems?
>>
>>         thanks
>>         david jencks
>>
>>
>>
> 

Mime
View raw message