geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rex Wang <rwo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Proposed tranql svn reorganization
Date Tue, 22 Sep 2009 03:39:14 GMT
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?

-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