james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Noel J. Bergman" <n...@devtech.com>
Subject RE: All clear
Date Sat, 10 Mar 2007 17:19:37 GMT
Stefano Bagnara wrote:

> Noel J. Bergman ha scritto:
>> robert burrell donkin wrote:
>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/james/server/trunk/ has been moved to
>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/james/server/trunk/pheonix-deployment/
>> HUH?!  If it is trunk it should be called trunk.  If it is some branch it
>> does NOT belong under trunk.  The SVN conventions are trunk, tags and
>> branches.  trunk is just that, and nothing else.
> I think that this is almost standard for multimodule/granular projects.

> This is a list of ASF projects I know follows the same approach:
> activemq, cayenne, cocoon, apacheds, geronimo, mina, maven-archiva,
> continuum, maven-components, jackrabbit...

I'd have to review each to see what each is actually doing.  A various
points in time, some projects had totally screwed up SVN structure.  But to
focus on the real issue ...

> Are you proposing to have a trunk/branches/tags structure for each
> submodule? I'm against this, but I'm open to discussion or to a vote.

It is very simple.  If something is a separately releasable/versionable
component, it gets a {ttb} structure.  Else it does not.

Having something like:

  trunk/
      mime4j/
      server/
      jsieve/
      ...

is the WRONG approach.  The right approach is what we are supposed to have:

   mime4/{ttb}
   server/{ttb}
   jsieve/{ttb}
   ...

My objection is that Robert introduced a level under trunk and at least
temporarily required that people switch to checking out that new level as
trunk.

	--- Noel



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org


Mime
View raw message