geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Proposed tranql svn reorganization
Date Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:52:05 GMT

On Sep 22, 2009, at 12:57 AM, Jack Cai wrote:

> In this case, how do we do the tag? Just tag each invidiual vendor  
> connector?

Yes, this is very similar to how the geronimo specs are released now.

thanks
david jencks

>
> -Jack
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 3:23 PM, David Jencks  
> <david_jencks@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> On Sep 21, 2009, at 8:39 PM, Rex Wang wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> 2009/9/22 Jack Cai <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> 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