[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-1184?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12984114#action_12984114
]
Eric Charles commented on JAMES-1184:
-------------------------------------
I use deep-nested maven modules for other projects, so I like the idea.
I'm a bit worried that we look at james-server only and not thinking on a james
wide level, for example I like the idea to group imap/pop3/smtp in a module you
called "protocols", but this is confusing with the top "protocols" project
which only holds smtp.
I wonder what the exercice would give if we started from the top-level james
folder, having that nested modules. would we regroup another way ? Would we
name modules differently (the module names, but also the prefix : some start
with james-server, other with apache-james).
btw, I don't think it's worth to start that exercice now, cause we've got to
foccus on 3.0 server release which can perfectly happen with current structure.
For now, I still translate "data" to "persist", so "queue" in "data" does not
sound good to me (queuing job is quite different from persisting).
> Modules consolidation
> ---------------------
>
> Key: JAMES-1184
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-1184
> Project: JAMES Server
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: Build System
> Affects Versions: 3.0-M2
> Reporter: Stefano Bagnara
> Assignee: Stefano Bagnara
> Fix For: 3.0-M3
>
> Attachments: graph-server-utils.gif, graph-server.gif
>
>
> Just opening it to keep track of the proposal to the mailing list.
> ------------
> - mail-file(3)
> - mail-jcr(1)
> - mail-jdbc(3)
> - user-jpa(4)
> - user-file(2)
> - user-jcr(2)
> - user-jdbc(4)
> - domainlist-jpa(2)
> - domainlist-xml(1)
> I only see benefits and no drawbacks in consolidating the 9 modules
> above to the following 4 modules:
> persistence-jpa(6) = user-jpa(4)+domainlist-jpa(2)
> persistence-file(6) = user-file(2)+mail-file(3)+domainlist-xml(1)
> persistence-jcr(3) = user-jcr(2)+mail-jcr(1)
> persistence-jdbc(7) = user-jdbc(4)+mail-jdbc(3)
> - mail-library(1)
> - domainlist-library(2)
> - user-library(9)
> We could consolidate them into a persistence-library module (from 3 to
> 1 module).
> persistence-library(12) =
> mail-library(1)+domainlist-library(2)+user-library(9)
> - queue-library(2)
> - queue-jms(5)
> We could merge queue-library to queue-jms (a library module makes
> sense when we do something useful.. if it is trivial stuff it can be
> duplicated or moved to the api layer).
> queue-jms(7) = queue-jms(5)+queue-library(2)
> -------------------------
> It seems there is agreement on the merging. We still have to decide whether
> to name the modules "persistence-${type}" or simply "${type}" (or maybe
> "data-${type}")
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscr...@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-h...@james.apache.org
