+1 makes sense to me. We've got time so lets update for 0.3... Sent from my iPhone
On May 7, 2013, at 1:46 AM, "Martin Desruisseaux" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Chris > > Le 07/05/13 01:20, Mattmann, Chris A (398J) a écrit : >> +1, but we should probably make all top level dirs consistent like this >> then too, right? > > In this proposal, the presence or absence of "sis-" prefix in directory name > would not be determined by whether the directory is top-level or not, but > rather by whether the directory is for a module producing a JAR file or is > just a container for such sub-modules. Or in other words, it would be > determined by whether the directory is a leaf in the modules tree or not. > Only leaves would have "sis-" prefix. > > In terms of Maven pom.xml, this would be determined by the <packaging> > element. "pom" packaging would have no "sis-" prefix, because they produce > nothing by themselves. "jar", "bundle" and "maven-plugin" packaging would > have the "sis-" prefix. > > If nevertheless we want to have top-level directories that looks like > consistent, one possible approach could be to group the current top-level > modules (except the "app" ones) in a "core" group. So the hierarchy could be > like below: > > core > - sis-utility > - sis-metadata > - sis-referencing > - sis-coverage > - ... > storage > - sis-shapefile > - sis-geotiff > - sis-postgis > - sis-netcdf > - ... > client > - sis-wms > - sis-wfs > - sis-csw > - ... > application > - sis-app > - sis-webapp > - ... > > > So the "core" which existed in SIS 0.2 would be back, but as a group of > modules rather than a single one. > > What do you think? > > Martin >
