streams-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sblackmon <sblack...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Why separate Streams-Master and Streams-Project ?
Date Mon, 14 Nov 2016 10:27:47 GMT

On November 11, 2016 at 5:17:11 PM, Matt Franklin (m.ben.franklin@gmail.com(mailto:m.ben.franklin@gmail.com))
wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 6:12 PM Suneel Marthi wrote:
>  
> > Why do we have 3 separate projects - Streams-master, Streams-project and
> > streams-examples?
> >
> 
The split between streams-master and streams-project has been there since the project started,
I think a legacy of how Rave was organized. The feedback related to naming (that ‘master’
is confusing given the source code is in git) makes sense to me.
>  
> >
> > While it may make sense to keep streams-examples separate from the others,
> > what's the reasoning behind keeping separate streams-master and
> > streams-project ?
> >
>  
> Keeping the master pom separate from the rest of the project is fairly
> common within Apache. It allows things that don't change often to be
> centralized, such as developer info, etc. I am +1 for keeping it on a
> separate release cycle and +0 for integrating it back into the main code
> repo.
> 
I’m -1 to separate release cycles - In reality we’re making a change to the POM and/or
the website, currently organized under streams-master, every release cycle, and it would be
confusing for developers if the versions became disconnected.

I’m +1 to merging streams-master into streams-project - I can’t think of any reasons that
wouldn’t work, it would simplify build, tests, CI, releases, and documentation.  We could
start by just moving the pom and setting the parent of streams-project as a streams-parent.xml
within the streams-project module and putting everything except for <build> and <plugins>
in the parent.
>
> IMO, the examples definitely deserve their own repo and release cycle.
> 
I agree.
>  
> > Presently, we need to build, deploy, verify and validate 3 separate
> > projects for a release to pass, unless I am completely
> > misunderstanding/missing something here I feel streams-master and
> > streams-project can both be one project.
> >
>  
> We don't have to release master unless there is a change to dist
> management, developers, etc.
> 
In reality we’re making a change to the POM and/or the website, currently organized under
streams-master, every release cycle, and it would be confusing for developers if the versions
became disconnected.
> 
> >
> > thoughts?
> >


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