On 23/12/2006, at 12:24 AM, Jesse McConnell wrote:
the project.id and projectGroup.id will basically disappear from
continuum, reserved strictly for the underlying store. The store can
do whatever it wants with them.
Ok, so a project(Group)? will have:
id : int
key : String
name : String
...
Where key is used as a reference, id is used as a datastore/model
identity, and name is used as a display. Sounds good.
We could then have a table of "old names":
id : int
oldKey : String
These could be used so that failed lookup on a key could then look in
the old key's to find out what the new one is (like when you move an
issue in JIRA). I'm not sure this is needed initially - only if we
support picking up renames to the project itself.
I suggest that a project should, by default, use the Maven group ID
and artifact Id as the group key and project key respectively.
Obviously, for Ant/Shell/etc, this will need to be entered by hand.
The UI will never pass around a
projectId=26 param on a url making you wonder what the heck it was. A
nice side effect of this IMO is that the #'s in the working directory
would go away as well, defaulting instead to a nested directory
structure of workingDirectory/GroupKey/ProjectKey/pom.xml
Cool. We could also do nice things with the URLs using a WW mapper:
/continuum/org.apache.maven/maven-project/buildHistory
Anyway, here are the restrictions I thought of placing on the keys.
* [a-zA-Z1-9.-:] for all keys
* group key is unique
* group key + project key is unique
* project key should _not_ need to be unique (ex Doxia/Core +
Maven/Core + Continuum/Core)
* keys are immutable, set upon creation
For now sounds good (would like to review immutability later), though
suggest using Maven IDs where possible.
Initially I was planning on doing just the project key and group key
since there is so much involved with getting just those two in place.
However everything would probably go that way so that Profiles,
Schedules, BuildDefinitions, etc...anything with an int ID that is
used around in continuum would be converted to use a strongly typed
string key instead....the ones other then project and group are less
important in the short term since they are not a constant source of
confusion...but eventually yes anything with and ID would get a Key
like this. If the branch is a success and is voted back onto trunk
then those could take place on trunk I think since they are smaller
scope.
Sounds good. I'm not sure how often you really need to reference a
schedule or build definition (or how you'd really appropriately
describe them). We don't want to go to the point where you have to
make up extra information that is not useful.
As for how they would relate to groupId's and artifactId's it was not
my intent to deal with those at all. One of the things that got us
into the mess that currently exists was too great a focus on the m2
side of continuum. IMO the group and project keys should be kept
external to any concept of project type. That way we can always
maintain a clear delineation between a group and its member projects
in relation to other groups. For instance, one of my goals here is to
make it super easy to have multiple versions of Doxia load up in
continuum and execute in their little sandboxes.
Whoa. Repeat the mantra - convention over configuration :)
One of the great strengths of Continuum is that it takes its defaults
from Maven. Sure, they can be changeable, but they *must* be the
default. That's not a mess.
As for multiple branches - I'm not convinced either way yet. I Can
see the merits in your example of simply making them new projects,
but then they need to be reconfigured (often in the same way). On the
other hand, it could be that branches should be a subsection of the
project, not an additional project. The hierachy would be group >
project > branch/instance. Notifiers and build definitions would be
attached to the group or the project, and can be excluded from a
given branch/instance if not used there.
Let's discuss that separately as it's obviously new functionality,
whereas loading them up as new projects is a workable current
solution. If we take the defaults, all that means is that adding a
second one should complain, and you need to edit the key. No big deal.
- Brett
