Fair enough... one component per repo. On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 10:26 AM Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 6/4/19 8:14 AM, Andy Taylor wrote: > > Id personally pefer a single repo per plugin, some plugins will develop > > quicker than others and with a single repo you would end up tagging and > > releasing plugins that havent changed. I dont think there is an overhead > > with using maven etc. > > Agreed, having each in its own repository running on its own release > cycle would be my preferred option as well. A single large repository > will tend to become harder to release as more things get dumped into it > but not actively maintained. It is easier for the release validation if > each is on its own as well, testing a release for a dozen different semi > related components will likely drive down the quality of the review > being done. > > > > > > I also think there should be no tight coupling between the plugin and the > > broker apart from implementing a specific API that should be set in stone. > > Even better would be the ability to just to drop a war or jar into the lib > > dir and have it deployed automagically via annotations on the class or > > method perhaps. > > > > On Mon, 3 Jun 2019 at 22:58, <michael.andre.pea...@me.com.invalid> wrote: > > > >> I just want it clarified what will be the rules of adopting a new plugin > >> or extension. Likewise the rule for archiving/killing off dead ones. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> And that is applied generically. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> E.g. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> At least one pmc member needs to sponsor (doesnt have to be the committer > >> or contributor) > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Any third party dependency plugin including dependency to third party > >> client jar must be apache license approved. (E.g. we can have plugin or > >> extension for a closed source commerical tool) > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Just want the criteria decides agreed and documented up front to avoid > >> less issues later on what can go in and what cant > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Get Outlook for Android > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 4:27 PM +0100, "Clebert Suconic" < > >> clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>> All questions need to be same > >> @Michael Pearce perhaps it's my english as second language here, but > >> this to me sounded like "All your basis are belong to us" :) > >> > >> Can you explain what you meant here? > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > -- > Tim Bish >
-- Clebert Suconic
