Hi Any other ideas? I'd propose the layout used in servicemix-bundles like described some emails ago - a separate maven module/project for each minor version of the feature.
Kindly regards Krzysztof On 09.02.2017 01:08, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote: > I think it's easier to maintain the content when we have all in one branch. > Tag is only a tag on a specific state, it's not a copy of the content. > With many branches we quickly lose the ability to easily maintain and > oversee the content. > > There is also no problem to maintain the feature specific bundles as we can > use following structure in this case > > feature-2.3.x/bundle1 > feature-2.3.x/bundle2 > feature-2.3.x/bundle3 > ... > feature-2.3.x/bundlen > feature-2.3.x/feature > > Kindly regards > Krzysztof > > > On 08.02.2017 23:58, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: >> I'm not a big fan of branches that way because it's not easily visible. >> Git modules is not really an alternative as it would force us to use a >> special structure. >> >> I don't think it's a problem to tag unused files. >> >> Regards >> JB >> >> On Feb 8, 2017, 18:48, at 18:48, Christian Schneider >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> The naming scheme you propose would match nicely with the current >>> scheme >>> we have in bundles. >>> What I see as a problem in both cases is that a git tag always covers >>> all content. So it would hold a lot of arbitrary files that are not >>> part >>> of the release. >>> >>> I have an unusual idea how we might do better. >>> >>> How about using one branch per "product" like spring and version >>> "group". >>> >>> Branches would be >>> spring-3.x >>> spring-3.1.x >>> spring-3.2.x >>> .. >>> Eventually also spring-3.1.3.x if we need to release the same spring >>> version a second time because of issues. >>> >>> Like you proposed as sub modules. >>> >>> Each spring branch would simply contain one directory >>> spring >>> with the structure for creating the spring feature. We could then >>> create >>> one tag per actual release. >>> >>> This would have the advantage that each branch only contains exactly >>> what we intend to release. >>> >>> Honestly I personally would even consider putting the bundles there too >>> >>> so the bundles and the feature of each spring release reside together >>> and can be released in one step. >>> As this was discussed this is only a personal remark. >>> >>> Christian >>> >>> >>> On 08.02.2017 21:58, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote: >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> The features repository is ready - >>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix-features.git. The >>> structure looks similar to the bundles repository but managing the >>> versions and separate feature modules is still open. One solution would >>> be the bundles way, e.g. submodule for each minor version like this >>>> spring-3.1.x >>>> spring-3.2.x >>>> .... >>>> spring-4.1.x >>>> spring-4.2.x >>>> spring-security-3.1.x >>>> activiti-5.19.x >>>> activiti-6.0.x >>>> ..... >>>> >>>> >>>> We could release next only the modules where we have fixed something >>> (like in bundles). What do you think? >>>> Kindly regards >>>> Krzysztof >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> Christian Schneider >>> http://www.liquid-reality.de >>> >>> Open Source Architect >>> http://www.talend.com > > -- > Krzysztof Sobkowiak (@ksobkowiak) > > JEE & OSS Architect, Integration Architect > Apache Software Foundation Member (http://apache.org/) > Apache ServiceMix Committer & PMC Member (http://servicemix.apache.org/) > Senior Solution Architect @ Capgemini SSC (http://www.capgeminisoftware.pl/) -- Krzysztof Sobkowiak (@ksobkowiak) JEE & OSS Architect, Integration Architect Apache Software Foundation Member (http://apache.org/) Apache ServiceMix Committer & PMC Member (http://servicemix.apache.org/) Senior Solution Architect @ Capgemini SSC (http://www.capgeminisoftware.pl/)
