incubator-empire-db-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rainer Döbele <>
Subject re: Building the release assembly
Date Sun, 05 Apr 2009 09:27:42 GMT
Hi Francis,

agreed that we should not make the release in a rush. If you need more time, no problem.
But I think we're feature complete and we now need something that we can discuss about. 
You will find that people are much more willing to give their opinion, once there is a release
candiate up for voting.
That's the main reason I want to go ahead so quickly. 
It is very likely that people will suggest changes then.

more comments see below:

> Re: Building the release assembly
> > But I have another issue concering the naming of the empire-struts2-ext:
> > I have delibertately chosen the name not to include the -db since there is no database
functionaltiy in there. The package namespace reflects this as well. Hence the name of the
jar should be empire-struts2-ext-xxx.jar (with xxx standing for the version string).
> > The same applies to the Maven artifact id which should be empire-struts2-ext.
> > Ideally this should also apply to the project name but this would probably be too
much hassle to change now.
> I don't agree here, the project is empire-db, or not? Otherwise I
> would call everyting empire-...
> The struts-2 extensions are the extensions for using struts2 with
> empire-db, what does empire without -db stand for?

Please look at all the package namespace names in both the empire-db and the empire-struts2-ext
They should give you a clue what the intention was.
All I am saying is that the jar names should reflect this.
There is always room for extentions above the db level.
I know it's a matter of taste, but I rather want to stick roughly to what we did in our previous

> > Also the version string should only be <version>2.0.5-SNAPSHOT</version>
(personally I would even remove the SNAPSHOT). I could change this myself, but they are your
files and I better ask beforehand.
> > Concering the naming I would suggest to stick to the naming of our previous release
> SNAPSHOT is a maven convention, there is no way around it. As release
> won't be called SNAPSHOT I don't see no problem. SNAPSHOT is the maven
> way to indicate a version between two releases.

Sorry if you misunderstood me here. I have no problem with the SNAPSHOT, apart from the thing
that we discussed last time, that we'd have to rebuild the assembly once it has been accepted
by the incubator PMC. But it is not necessary, that the jars contain the incubating. So e.g.
empire-db-2.0.5-SNAPSHOT.jar is fine for me. But the incubating must be part of the release
assembly name.

> I'm still for the easy (kiss) solution that most apache projects use.
> Have the project name definded (empire or empire-db), all modules have
> the same version and are called [empire name]-[module].

Yes, I am a big KISS fan too, except that I didn't like their make-up (joking).
I like to phrase to keep it as simple as possible but as complex as necessary.

> >
> > Please let me know, when you have changed the assembly generation so I can check
it an possibly put it up for voting.
> > I think we both want to get this release out asap.
> I'd like to know what other ppl are thinking about this. It's just
> that preparing new releases should not be a hassle. I'll make some
> time to apply the changes to the assembly.
> >
> > Regards
> > Rainer
> >
> >

  • Unnamed multipart/mixed (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message