Thats a concern for me. Also the setup for every repo.I think personally having
a single repo will be easier for starters. We can always split out groups of
modules later, or even one per module. If it gets too much.But for a first go i
think having a single repo for plugins and other extensions will be better.Sent
from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
-------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic
<clebert.suco...@gmail.com> Date: 31/05/2019 20:12 (GMT+00:00) To:
dev@activemq.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Component/Plugin repository On
Fri, May 31, 2019 at 2:42 PM Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote:>>
I probably would do one each, yes. Its the easiest separation, keeps> things
independent and focused from the start and can avoid various> hassles later.>>
I'd perhaps consider 'all <foo> stuff' aggregation (e.g foo => metrics), but
really I dont personally see the benefits as outweighing> the other things a
lot of the time. I dont think anyone is charging us> per repo.No, but does it
require a vote each time we spin a new component?>> With a shared repo I guess
you would just tag everything, or else> start down the route of complications
that also make individual repos> seem nice. Could use Subversion, subdir tags
were easy there :)>> (Aside, there is one project, ActiveMQ. These would be
components).>> On Fri, 31 May 2019 at 17:24, Clebert Suconic
<clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote:> >> > I agree with you, and that was my
preference as well. I was trying to> > understand if one git per component is
what Robbie was suggesting.> >> > Although there's an issue though, when you
have one super git for many> > independent components, how would you tag
releases?> >> > each fodler would be in fact an independent project, with no> >
correlation between the projects.> >> > On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 8:00 AM
<michael.andre.pea...@me.com.invalid> wrote:> > >> > > I think one git repo per
thing maybecome a bit too scattery. Id go for one repo with multiple modules.>
> >> > >> > >> > >> > > Get Outlook for Android> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>
> >> > > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 7:42 PM +0100, "Clebert Suconic"
<clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote:> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >
>> > >> > > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 12:25 PM Robbie Gemmell> > > wrote:> > >
>> > > > I would put them outwith the broker repository. Not really because of>
> > > bloat, which was only a very small part of why I didnt think the> > > >
proposed Kafka Bridge should live inside the broker repo+package for> > > >
example, but thats certainly also something to keep in mind given the> > > >
build is pretty large/slow already.> > > >> > > > I wouldnt say a single plugin
repository is necessarily a great idea,> > > > it can tend to become a bit of a
dumping ground for idea-of-the-week,> > > > but the main thing for me would be
that components should be> > > > independently released if there were to be a
bunch of optional> > > > components with mostly unrelated functionality in the
same place (e.g,> > > > the ideas mentioned in this thread already seem mostly
independent).> > >> > > So, what do you suggest? one gitRepo per plugin?> > >>
> >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> > --> > Clebert Suconic-- Clebert Suconic
