Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>
>>Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>can someone give me a hint on what's the procedure to release a
>>>subproject? Is a vote necessary?
>>
>>For releases, always, as said in our Project Guidelines.
>>
>>"
>>Release Plan
>>
>>A release plan is used to keep all volunteers aware of when a release is
>>desired, who will be the release manager, when the repository will be
>>frozen to create a release, and other assorted information to keep
>>volunteers from tripping over each other. Lazy majority decides each
>>issue in a release plan.
>>
>>Release Testing
>>
>>After a new release is built, it must be tested before being released to
>>the public. Majority approval is required before the release can be made.
>>"
>>
> In our case the components are tested very well in Cocoon.
Yes. Now the majority vote :-)
>>>I want to release the store, the xmlutil and the sourceresolve
>>>subprojects. Anyone against it?
>>
>>Before releasing excalibur components, I prefer to check if we can move
>>the stuff elswhere, before creating a legacy here.
>>
>>So -1 till anyone wanting to release excalibur stuff explains why these
>>have to be released here versus be in some kind of Commons.
>>
>
> Ah, the good old discussion about commons vs. avalon. Great!
It's not a discussion, it's a simple fact.
If a component has no needed dependencies to Avalon Framework, it should
go in Commons.
>>Now more specific points:
>>- xmlutil -1: seems like a package for xml-commons, no Avalon dependency
>>
>
> Hmm, xmlutil provides Avalon components. I'm fine with moving them if
> xml-commons wants to have a dependency on avalon.
Sorry, I somehow looked at another xmlutil package I had on my hd, in
fact yes, they are Avalon xml components.
+1
BTW, I would /personally/ not call them xmlutil, but simply xml, as
javax.xml...
Usually *util is used for helper classes and static methods, which is
not the case here.
>>- sourceresolve +1: seems like a non-commons-convertible Avalon
>>component to me
>>
>>- store -0: it *is* an Avalon Component, but there is a cool simplestore
>>package in Jakarta-commons-sandbox, written by Gerhard Froehlich
>>([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Juozas Baliuka ([EMAIL PROTECTED]).
>>Gerhard, what's the status? Can't we make our store use simplestore as
>>an impl?
>>
>
> Again, this project defines components (with an implementation). It is
> of course possible to add an implementation which uses a commons-sandbox
> implementation - but that's optional in my eyes.
After the mail of Gerhard, +1.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
