jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Tim Reilly" <tim.rei...@consultant.com>
Subject RE: Welcome to Apache Jackrabbit (Modified by Paul Russell)
Date Thu, 16 Sep 2004 03:11:28 GMT
> [Paul Russell wrote:]
> Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 11:27 AM
> On 13 Sep 2004, at 11:43, Stefan Guggisberg wrote:
> > On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 22:47:56 -0700, Roy T. Fielding
> > <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote:
> >> The code itself needs to be migrated from slide cvs to subversion.
> >> When that happens (probably sometime today/tomorrow, assuming I get
> >> the request to infrastructure tonight), it will be located at
> >>
> >>    https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/jackrabbit/trunk
> >
> > what do you think of "org.apache.jackrabbit.jcr.*" for the ri and
> > "org.apache.jackrabbit.tck.*" for the tck? any better ideas?
> +1. I'm happy with this, as a starting point at least. My guess is that
> the structure of the project as a whole, and therefore the package
> hierarchy is likely to evolve significantly over the next few months as
> we all set scope & strategy and get acquainted. The good news is that
> since we're using SVN, it's not like it's a nightmare to change the
> package names if we need to, particularly prior to the 1.0 release.
> > as the package structure needs to be changed (and the code needs to be
> > refactored to reflect the new package structure), i would volunteer to
> > refactor the code first and commit it to svn. does anybody object?
> Absolutely fine by me.
> > btw, what should i do with the 'old' proposal code in the slide cvs?
> > if nobody has any objections, i will remove
> > jakarta-slide/proposals/jcrri
> > (it will still be accessible in the attic).
> Again, that sounds reasonable. Let's not leave 'JCR droppings'
> everywhere, eh? ;)
> > tim reilly has suggested a while ago that the jcrri project should be
> > 'mavenized'.
> > he has also offered to help convert the current project setup to maven
> > style.
> > i think now would be a perfect opportunity to do the conversion.
> > any comments/objections?
> I'm +1 on this, with the major caveat that I /do not/ want this to
> become a big debate. If people have strong reservations about using
> Maven, I'd rather we postponed the discussion until we have more
> evidence either way as to the worth of it in this project.
> Personally, I like Maven, and have used it on a few projects. In
> general, these have been things that have complex dependancies, or have
> lots of 'modules' contained within the umbrella project. It seems to
> work well, although I acknowledge that it has become a bit of a beast.
> Can I make a suggestion?
> * If everyone is happy with using Maven for the time being, then lets
> do so and see how it goes.
> * If people have strong reservations, then can I suggest we at least
> adopt the same project higheracy? This would allow us to easily switch
> to maven later if we decided to do so, and would imply a higheracy that
> looks something like:
> 	* main java source -> src/java
> 	* main resources -> src/resources
> 	* test java source -> src/test
> 	* test resources -> src/test-data
> 	* main compile target -> target/classes
> 	* test compile target -> target/test-classes
> 	* distributions -> target/distributions

+1 to all above.

> I should be able to help Tim with this also: I'm not hugely experienced
> with the 'site' side of maven, but have done basic work with it.
> Paul

+1 here as well ;-)
Sorry for the delay (I'd been away for about 3 weeks, still getting myself
I asked about SVN support on Maven-User and SVN support has been added to
the scm plugin.
I'll test out my jira powers create a "Mavenize project" issue and to attach
a zip containing a first run of mavenizing
(this is outdated - from a few months ago, but hopefully provides a starting
point in terms of the POM and some xdocs - for review.) Ah, in the event
there are maven objections; we can mark the issue invalid later. Sound good?

Best regards,

View raw message