If we are going to start releasing these separately (or really just
being prepared to) then I think this would be worth doing. It's a
fairly simple change to do even now so should we do this for this
release?
Speaking of which, it looks like EMF 2.2.1 is available from their
maven repo. AIUI that was the last thing that was needed before
cutting a release - should we start that process?
--
Jeremy
On Sep 26, 2006, at 4:09 AM, kelvin goodson wrote:
I have made a branch for SDO at
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/branches/sdo-java-
M2/which
I thought it might be worth drawing your attention to, since it might
be helpful that we had a common approach across the projects. I
think we
are going to want separate branches per project, as we will be
ready to
branch at different times.
I had to assemble my branch with a couple of svn mkdirs and three
svn copy
commands, which feels a little awkward. It begs the question of
whether,
post M2, we should consider having all the sub-project stuff under
one svn
folder, e.g. java/sdo/spec, java/sdo/distribution, java/sdo/impl --
rather
than the current java/distribution/sdo, java/spec/sdo and java/
sdo. I think
this would be much cleaner, and easier to cut source distributions
too. We
could then have java/sdo/branches. This is in line with best
practice as
given by the svn free book http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.1/
ch04s07.html.
What do you think?
Regards, Kelvin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
