Menu
▾
▴
springframework-developer
|
From: Keith D. <ke...@in...> - 2005-06-19 02:52:47
|
We need to reach a consensus on what to call our core "spring modules" repository here at sourceforge and the extension "spring modules" repository over at java.net. Right now we're calling the core stuff "spring projects" - but I'm not sure about that usage, "modules" seems like such a better name. However, having two "spring modules" is obviously confusing. What about calling the core modules "spring modules" and the work happening over at java.net "spring extensions"? That seems like an ideal situation. What do you think? Rob? Colin? Juergen? Would it be possible to rename the java.net effort or is it too late for that? Thanks, Keith -- Keith Donald Interface21 Principal Consultant http://www.springframework.com <http://www.springframework.com/> |
|
From: Erwin V. <erw...@er...> - 2005-06-19 06:06:28
|
Check the following: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.springframework.devel/8723 http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.springframework.devel/8729 http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.springframework.devel/8730 So as I understand it we'll stick with "spring-projects" for the time = being. Erwin Vervaet erw...@er... ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Keith Donald=20 To: spr...@li...=20 Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2005 4:52 AM Subject: [Springframework-developer] spring modules/spring = projects/spring extensions We need to reach a consensus on what to call our core "spring modules" = repository here at sourceforge and the extension "spring modules" = repository over at java.net. =20 Right now we're calling the core stuff "spring projects" - but I'm not = sure about that usage, "modules" seems like such a better name. =20 However, having two "spring modules" is obviously confusing. =20 What about calling the core modules "spring modules" and the work = happening over at java.net "spring extensions"? That seems like an = ideal situation. What do you think? Rob? Colin? Juergen? Would it be = possible to rename the java.net effort or is it too late for that? =20 Thanks, =20 Keith =20 --=20 Keith Donald Interface21 Principal Consultant http://www.springframework.com =20 |
|
From: Juergen H. <ju...@in...> - 2005-06-19 09:10:13
|
Well, I guess the proper naming partly depends on what granularity we're gonna use over here at the core CVS. If we don't go down the fine-grained module route but rather keep things at a course-grained subproject level, "spring-projects" will be perfectly fine. This still hasn't been decided yet, though... Juergen -----Original Message----- From: spr...@li... [mailto:spr...@li...]On Behalf Of Erwin Vervaet Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2005 8:10 AM To: spr...@li... Subject: Re: [Springframework-developer] spring modules/spring projects/spring extensions Check the following: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.springframework.devel/8723 http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.springframework.devel/8729 http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.springframework.devel/8730 So as I understand it we'll stick with "spring-projects" for the time being. Erwin Vervaet erw...@er... ----- Original Message ----- From: Keith Donald To: spr...@li... Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2005 4:52 AM Subject: [Springframework-developer] spring modules/spring projects/spring extensions We need to reach a consensus on what to call our core spring modules repository here at sourceforge and the extension spring modules repository over at java.net. Right now were calling the core stuff spring projects but Im not sure about that usage, modules seems like such a better name However, having two spring modules is obviously confusing. What about calling the core modules spring modules and the work happening over at java.net spring extensions? That seems like an ideal situation. What do you think? Rob? Colin? Juergen? Would it be possible to rename the java.net effort or is it too late for that? Thanks, Keith -- Keith Donald Interface21 Principal Consultant http://www.springframework.com |
|
From: Alexandru P. <apo...@ez...> - 2005-06-19 19:07:36
|
#: by Keith Donald's words the mind was *winged* :# > We need to reach a consensus on what to call our core "spring modules" > repository here at sourceforge and the extension "spring modules" repository > over at java.net. > > > > Right now we're calling the core stuff "spring projects" - but I'm not sure > about that usage, "modules" seems like such a better name. > > > > However, having two "spring modules" is obviously confusing. > > > > What about calling the core modules "spring modules" and the work happening > over at java.net "spring extensions"? That seems like an ideal situation. > What do you think? Rob? Colin? Juergen? Would it be possible to rename the > java.net effort or is it too late for that? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Keith > > > Even if i am not part of Spring team I would go for these names. :alex |.::the_mindstorm::.| |
|
From: Colin S. <col...@ex...> - 2005-06-19 20:01:11
|
Keith Donald wrote: > We need to reach a consensus on what to call our *core* “spring > modules” repository here at sourceforge and the *extension *“spring > modules” repository over at java.net. > > Right now we’re calling the core stuff “spring projects” – but I’m not > sure about that usage, “modules” seems like such a better name… > > However, having two “spring modules” is obviously confusing. > > What about calling the core modules “spring modules” and the work > happening over at java.net “spring extensions”? That seems like an > ideal situation. What do you think? Rob? Colin? Juergen? Would it be > possible to rename the java.net effort or is it too late for that? > Well, I have to agree with your suggestion; that's why I gave the original CVS module the name spring-modules, despite the java.net project having the same name. The name just seems best suited for the modules that make up Spring itself, whereas what's at java.net is more extensions, integrations, or related projects. Obviously our CVS can go either way. Right now there is both spring-modules and spring-projects in it (the former was going to be pruned, while the latter has the most current code). I just don't know how much work it'd be for somebody (Rob I guess since he's admin there) to change the java.net project, and how in agreement he is to make a change there. Ultimately I don't feel like a big argument over a name... Colin |
|
From: Juergen H. <ju...@in...> - 2005-06-19 20:19:28
|
I believe that the most important separation at this point of time is between different distributions. Each distribution needs to have its own part of the repository, for administration reasons. A distribution corresponds more to a project than a module, so "spring-projects" is not inappropriate, IMO. Whether we go more fine-granular and create separate modules in the repository even for parts of a distribution is still undecided for me. There is arguably no strong need to do this, at least not at this point of time - in contrast to the separate distributions (Web Flow etc), where we absolutely _need_ a separation in the repository. As I already indicated earlier, I'm not a great fan of fine-granular source repositories in general. I tend to prefer a single unified codebase _per distribution_, with a simple and straightforward build, rather than a dozen module source trees in my IDE project tree. This has proven to work up to now, so I wouldn't mind continuing down that road. In my opinion, our real problem was the sandbox, which was used for code that was supposed to end up in separate distributions. The sandbox should really only be used for stuff that's supposed to end up in the Spring core distribution. That problem has been addressed already through factoring out Web Flow and co, so I don't see a strong need to do any further splitting. Of course, if we decide to do further splits _at the distribution level_, a need for further splitting of the CVS repository would arise. However, there are currently no concrete plans to do so... Juergen -----Original Message----- From: spr...@li... [mailto:spr...@li...]On Behalf Of Colin Sampaleanu Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2005 10:01 PM To: spr...@li... Subject: Re: [Springframework-developer] spring modules/spring projects/spring extensions Keith Donald wrote: > We need to reach a consensus on what to call our *core* “spring > modules” repository here at sourceforge and the *extension *“spring > modules” repository over at java.net. > > Right now we’re calling the core stuff “spring projects” – but I’m not > sure about that usage, “modules” seems like such a better name… > > However, having two “spring modules” is obviously confusing. > > What about calling the core modules “spring modules” and the work > happening over at java.net “spring extensions”? That seems like an > ideal situation. What do you think? Rob? Colin? Juergen? Would it be > possible to rename the java.net effort or is it too late for that? > Well, I have to agree with your suggestion; that's why I gave the original CVS module the name spring-modules, despite the java.net project having the same name. The name just seems best suited for the modules that make up Spring itself, whereas what's at java.net is more extensions, integrations, or related projects. Obviously our CVS can go either way. Right now there is both spring-modules and spring-projects in it (the former was going to be pruned, while the latter has the most current code). I just don't know how much work it'd be for somebody (Rob I guess since he's admin there) to change the java.net project, and how in agreement he is to make a change there. Ultimately I don't feel like a big argument over a name... Colin ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click _______________________________________________ Springframework-developer mailing list Spr...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer |
|
From: Alexandru P. <apo...@ez...> - 2005-06-19 20:41:07
|
From my user point of view - with Spring CVS daily updates though (pls le= t me know if the discussion is only between Spring developers) the current Spring codebase organizati= on seems quite nice. I have read before the discussion about different artifacts, and again imo the c= urrent distro seems to me the most appropriate. I second Juergen when saying that a single sourcebase is much easier to m= anage with a `smart=B4 build. sorry if this is supposed to be developer inhouse discussion, :alex |.::the_mindstorm::.| #: by Juergen Hoeller's words the mind was *winged* :# > I believe that the most important separation at this point of time is > between different distributions. Each distribution needs to have its ow= n > part of the repository, for administration reasons. A distribution > corresponds more to a project than a module, so "spring-projects" is no= t > inappropriate, IMO. >=20 > Whether we go more fine-granular and create separate modules in the > repository even for parts of a distribution is still undecided for me. = There > is arguably no strong need to do this, at least not at this point of ti= me - > in contrast to the separate distributions (Web Flow etc), where we > absolutely _need_ a separation in the repository. >=20 > As I already indicated earlier, I'm not a great fan of fine-granular so= urce > repositories in general. I tend to prefer a single unified codebase _pe= r > distribution_, with a simple and straightforward build, rather than a d= ozen > module source trees in my IDE project tree. This has proven to work up = to > now, so I wouldn't mind continuing down that road. >=20 > In my opinion, our real problem was the sandbox, which was used for cod= e > that was supposed to end up in separate distributions. The sandbox shou= ld > really only be used for stuff that's supposed to end up in the Spring c= ore > distribution. That problem has been addressed already through factoring= out > Web Flow and co, so I don't see a strong need to do any further splitti= ng. >=20 > Of course, if we decide to do further splits _at the distribution level= _, a > need for further splitting of the CVS repository would arise. However, = there > are currently no concrete plans to do so... >=20 > Juergen >=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: spr...@li... > [mailto:spr...@li...]On Behalf > Of Colin Sampaleanu > Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2005 10:01 PM > To: spr...@li... > Subject: Re: [Springframework-developer] spring modules/spring > projects/spring extensions >=20 >=20 > Keith Donald wrote: >=20 >> We need to reach a consensus on what to call our *core* =93spring >> modules=94 repository here at sourceforge and the *extension *=93sprin= g >> modules=94 repository over at java.net. >> >> Right now we=92re calling the core stuff =93spring projects=94 =96 but= I=92m not >> sure about that usage, =93modules=94 seems like such a better name=85 >> >> However, having two =93spring modules=94 is obviously confusing. >> >> What about calling the core modules =93spring modules=94 and the work >> happening over at java.net =93spring extensions=94? That seems like an >> ideal situation. What do you think? Rob? Colin? Juergen? Would it be >> possible to rename the java.net effort or is it too late for that? >> > Well, I have to agree with your suggestion; that's why I gave the > original CVS module the name spring-modules, despite the java.net > project having the same name. The name just seems best suited for the > modules that make up Spring itself, whereas what's at java.net is more > extensions, integrations, or related projects. >=20 > Obviously our CVS can go either way. Right now there is both > spring-modules and spring-projects in it (the former was going to be > pruned, while the latter has the most current code). I just don't know > how much work it'd be for somebody (Rob I guess since he's admin there) > to change the java.net project, and how in agreement he is to make a > change there. Ultimately I don't feel like a big argument over a name..= . >=20 > Colin >=20 >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies > from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, > informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to > speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dcl= ick > _______________________________________________ > Springframework-developer mailing list > Spr...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer >=20 >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies > from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, > informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to > speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dcl= ick > _______________________________________________ > Springframework-developer mailing list > Spr...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer >=20 >=20 |
