On 2/28/06, Mark Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Remy Maucherat wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I think it is time to decide how the source repository is going to be > > organized, with the questions being: > > - how many source folders do we need (Costin wanted one, while others > > like Jacob seem to want "modules") ? > > - do we continue to use Ant ? > > - etc > > I am +0 on any changes. > > Assuming some changes are made, there needs to be some thought given > to where in the source tree we put the trunk/branch/tag structure > before we start moving things around.
Well, single source tree means all source will be in one svn repo. My understanding is that you can label/tag/branch subdirs - and that a tag is cheap enough that you can do it for the entire tree. I think it's better to tag the entire tree - not just the component, so it's easier to reproduce ( since it has deps, etc ). That seems the current practice. > There have also been various comments made that different components > may be released on different release cycles. If this route is > followed, there needs to be a reasonably clear idea of what these > components might be as this will also have an impact on the best way > to structure the source. > I don't think the source structure should be related to release structure. >From one source tree you can generate as many jars and packages as you want, in any structure or variation. Things like 'el' or 'jspc' or maybe cluster could chose to release - either as a jar, or as a .tar.gz or anything else. Or maybe not - that should be an independent decision from source tree layout or build mechanism. Costin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
