On 8/15/06, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Rahul Akolkar wrote:
> On 8/12/06, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Oliver Heger wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > just wanted to ask if there is already a resolution related to the
>> > groupIds of commons components.
>> >
> <snip/>
>>
>> Everything is set to make the transition to the new groupId. I was
>> hoping that we could use the upcoming release of configuration as the
>> first release with the new groupId.
>>
> <snap/>
>
> Do we want to do this? Shouldn't we transition all of Commons together
> (as Tomasz implies in previous post, and just like we did with the
> JIRA transition). Suboptimal if folks have to look up which components
> have migrated yet, there are different groupIds for Commons components
> in the same POM etc.
We should do all of commons, I agree, but I think it would be wise to
start with one component and see that everything works as expected. Then
we do the rest all in one big transition.
Yes, but instead of transiting something, that depends on other commons
IMHO something without dependencies should be transited first.
In other words, first thing to be done should be a graph of dependencies
between various commons packages and those without dependencies
should be migrated first. I guess commons-lang is a good candidate here,
not configuration that depdends on many other (not migrated yet) components.
Regards,
Tomek
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
