oodt-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sean Kelly <ke...@apache.org>
Subject Re: couple more pom issues
Date Fri, 23 Jul 2010 02:39:23 GMT
I mentioned in our chat room before how if we really did need to impose some kind of organization
then it ought to be done with the namespace feature already provided by Java: the package
declaration. I can't recall why that idea fell out of favor, though.

I'm +1 for dropping the prefixes.


On 2010.Jul.22, at 9.13p, David M Woollard wrote:

> I think this view conflicts with OODT-5 [1]. For my own two cents, I think simplicity
should trump previous historical organization, so I would rather see the prefixes removed.
> 
> Anyone else have an opinion on the subject?
> 
> -Dave
> 
> 
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OODT-5
> 
> 
> On Jul 22, 2010, at 5:10 PM, Sean Kelly wrote:
> 
>> I believe the overall goal is to have two part names for all modules:
>> 
>> — cas-* for catalog/archive components
>> — grid-* for traditional oodt profile & product components
>> — oodt-* for common components
>> 
>> So the correct dependency is cas-filemgr and the correct version should be ${oodt.version},
aka 0.1-incubating.
>> 
>> I think.
>> 
>> 
>>> In addition to the jug/s problem Sean found, I have noticed that in two cases
components (curator and crawler) depended on a filemgr-1.9-dev.jar rather than the cas-filemgr-0.1-incubating.jar.
I have changed these over for the time being (see r966887 and r966889), but I wanted those
more knowledgeable of these three components know. 
>> 
> 


Mime
View raw message