river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Hurley <Jim.Hur...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: JSTK import (Was: Short term plan forward... (proposal))
Date Thu, 07 Jun 2007 15:03:00 GMT
Hi all-

Not sure if there was consensus on this...   so just doing a quick
double check that we've got agreement.  Based on most of the
responses, folks seemed to support Frank's proposal of sticking
with the JTSK repository structure (and moving serviceui to fit in).

There was an alternate structure proposed (adding one additional
level of src) by Craig Russell:

That's certainly a reasonable idea, but doing so will break the
build (whether that would need to get fixed prior to or after import is
another question).

So...  let's approach it this way --  our default plan is to stick
with the jtsk repository for initial import.  If you agree, feel
free to respond with a +1 or just stay happily silent.  If you're
against this approach (and prefer Craig's proposal or another),
please respond with a -1 (and your ideas).

We're anxious to get this in (today if possible) -- so **please**
give it some immediate consideration.

thanks much -Jim

On May 30, 2007, at 2:44 PM, Frank Barnaby wrote:
> :
> While we're on the subject, I have a question regarding the SVN  
> repository
> structure.  Once we're ready to upload to SVN, we're going to need  
> a plan
> for the repository layout or does such a plan already exist?  If  
> not, I'd
> imagine the JTSK repository would basically look like the following:
> 	trunk/jtsk/
> 		build.xml
> 		build_common.xml
> 		doc/
> 		src/
> Or should we be more consistent with the current serviceui repository?
> 	trunk/serviceui/
> 		doc/
> 		com/
> 		net/
> If it's decided the the jtsk repository is to be consistent with  
> the serviceui
> repository (ie, move jtsk/src/* up one level), the ant scripts will  
> be initially
> broken but could be fixed in short order as one of the initial  
> development tasks.
> Alternatively, the serviceui repository could be changed to be  
> consistent with
> the jtsk repository...  At first glance, this approach seems like  
> it would be
> more straight forward.

View raw message