+1.
I think it's in line with the proposal in my response to Meeraj.
One question: For a bundle to reference a module in the Tuscany source tree,
do we really have to copy (or use svn:externals property) if it points to a
location (under trunk, tags, or branches) in the Tuscany tree? I think a
relative path for the <module> will work.
Thanks,
Raymond
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremy Boynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 10:10 AM
Subject: Build structure - having cake and still eating
We know from M2 experience and the number of "profiles" in the
integration branch that a top-down, build-everything approach does not
work.
We also know from practical experience that people struggle building
modules.
I believe there is a middle ground that supports both approaches;
* have a flat module structure that allows any module to be built on its
own
using dependencies from the mvn repos
* have particular assemblies that pull modules together into whatever
bundles
people want. The assemblies can use released modules from mvn, snapshot
modules from mvn, a copy of any revision of that module, or can track
trunk using svn externals
An example of this is the assembly I used for the tag for the TSSS demo
code which uses a combination of released artifacts and known revisions.
This gives module developers their own space to work in, and allows
people consuming those modules to choose how stable the code they want to
use is (from released through to head).
Hopefully this will provide a middle ground we are all comfortable with.
--
Jeremy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
