On 18/07/2008, at 10:11 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
I'll sync up with Oleg and takes the notes out of SVN and put them
in a proposal. At this point Greg, Jan, Jesse, myself, Oleg and soon
Shane will have their fingers in the pie. This is a pretty
significant effort and should be documented. It's mostly the
processes and algorithms that need to be vetted.
Yes, I think that's essential to getting others involved. The previous
discussion about the SAT solver was a helpful starting point, and I
like the direction it is taking, but more info needs to be spelled out.
Here are my current questions I'd like to see addressed by it:
- spell out the problems in the current artifact mechanism already
solved by it (eg, conflict resolution, reduced metadata consultation,
deterministic?)
- what infrastructure/metadata changes it will require server side
- how/if deployment will be handled or delegated wagon
- how it's going to be integrated into Maven proper
If I can see a path to adoption for it I'm more likely to get involved
myself.
On 17-Jul-08, at 7:26 PM, Jesse McConnell wrote:
Anyway, I am interested in hearing how folks want to address this in
mercury so any thoughts are more then welcome. I am not sure how
much
mercury has been discussed on the dev list up to this point but I am
assuming that most of you have an inkling of what the goal of mercury
is...if not ask away and someone will chime in :)
Thanks for getting the ball rolling Jesse!
Cheers,
Brett
--
Brett Porter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
