incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Les Hazlewood" <...@hazlewood.com>
Subject Re: Again: The Maven Repository
Date Thu, 26 Jun 2008 13:59:40 GMT
Martijn,

This is excellent feedback, thanks very much!

That being said, it would make everyone's lives easier if incubator
releases were in the central repository, so I still vote +1 on that ;)

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 9:39 AM, Martijn Dashorst
<martijn.dashorst@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 3:23 PM, Les Hazlewood <les@hazlewood.com> wrote:
>> JSecurity also meets condition b)
>>
>> Our users will scream bloody murder if they can no longer access
>> JSecurity from the central repository.  So we'll continue to publish
>> there, even if it means publishing under the old org.jsecurity group
>> id.
>
> Which is perfectly fine IMO. Wicket did the same, just not the Apache
> Wicket code. It is the aim to stay in the incubator as short as
> possible. This means that you need to focus on meeting the graduation
> criteria: create a diverse open meritocratic community, ensure all
> legal bits are resolved and release your code (at least once). I would
> therefore continue maintaining the old jsecurity code, and release
> those outside the incubator, just as normal business for your project.
> This provides the necessary stability for your users, and prevent them
> from screaming bloody murder. New development (pick enough features to
> keep you busy for a couple of months - year) should happen in the
> incubator code base, so you can add new developers, and learn to work
> the Apache Way (tm). I'd suggest also to rename the packages only when
> you are almost ready to graduate. This allows you to merge current
> development and maintenance quite easily.
>
> THe WIcket project did have all code imported into the incubator repo,
> so we could easily backport features/bug fixes. We just released the
> artifacts on sourceforge and uploaded them ourselves to the central
> repo using the outside channels. We *did* make perfectly clear that
> even though Wicket is in the incubator, that the release wasn't
> endorsed by nor associated with Apache. You can look at the releases
> for Wicket 1.2 (http://wicketframework.org/wicket-1.2) to see how we
> did this.
>
> The Apache based development (org.apache.wicket) happened in parallel,
> but for the most part in the same namespace as the old wicket code. We
> did create a couple of releases inside the incubator to learn how to
> perform an Apache release. But iirc we never actually published those
> releases to the greater public.
>
> This process worked great for Wicket, but your mileage may vary.
>
> Martijn
>
> --
> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
> Apache Wicket 1.3.3 is released
> Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.3
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message