For 2.2 based subprojects, I like the idea of publishing the patched artifacts under a org.apache.geronimo.patches groupid and will work on that solution as soon as I finish updating the 2.1 subproject builds.
-Donald Kevan Miller wrote:
On Aug 7, 2008, at 8:26 PM, Donald Woods wrote:True, but wouldn't that introduce the overhead of our release process and voting?I wouldn't call it overhead. I'd call it oversight. Our community is releasing the patches and publishing the binaries. Server release votes have covered this, to date. Any process changes must maintain this same level of oversight.Would we create a geronimo/patches subproject arranged like our specs, where each artifact would be its own subdir and still check the patched artifacts in for the build to use and then move them to tags after they are released?We could release them separately. Or, we could include them (as they are currently) in the server. The difference is that there would be org.apache.geronimo.patches artifacts in our release and snapshot repositories.Would we version the artifacts based on the originating project or with a double version like we specs (which would be hard to follow)?Either way would work. For simplicity, my tendency is to include them in our server tree. However, there may be differing opinions. I'm fine either way...--kevan
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
