Move META to CVS Head?

[Eric Pugh <ep...@upstate.com>]

Henning,

I was wondering if there is any good reason to not have the META plugin be
in CVS head versus Turbine_2_3 branch?  I view the components in /extensions
as having their own release cycle from the rest of turbine..  I think that
if you do your work with META in HEAD, then you can release it as and when
you want...   That way, other folks can keep an eye on how you are doing,
without having to have 2 copies of turbine..

What do you think?  It also seems like META is in a pretty usable state?

Eric


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

Re: Move META to CVS Head?

["Henning P. Schmiedehausen" <hp...@intermeta.de>]

"Eric Pugh" <ep...@upstate.com> writes:

>Henning,

>I was wondering if there is any good reason to not have the META plugin be
>in CVS head versus Turbine_2_3 branch?  I view the components in /extensions

There is no turbine-2.4 personality yet, so it would nice to have it
there but unless someone with better knowledge of the current
dependencies of Turbine 2.4-dev creates a turbine-2.4 flavor (it is
not that hard, basically you must create
src/plugin-resources/flavours/turbine-2.4/maven/project.xml and check
whether the files in common satisfy the needs of a 2.4 application. If
you need more files (and I think that you do) for configuring the
turbine 2.4 framework like merlin.properties, they also go into
flavour/turbine-2.4.

>as having their own release cycle from the rest of turbine..  I think that
>if you do your work with META in HEAD, then you can release it as and when
>you want...   That way, other folks can keep an eye on how you are doing,
>without having to have 2 copies of turbine..

We could also move the plugin completely out of the turbine-2 /
turbine-3 tree into its own jakarta-turbine-meta tree (which I would
very much prefer to have because then we could be completely
independent from the turbine-2.4/turbine-2.3 cycle). (Shall we vote on this?).

>What do you think?  It also seems like META is in a pretty usable state?

I would like to get a bit more feedback especially on the inplace mode
(which I don't use), but as I eat my own dog food (I use it all the
time), I think we are approaching a release-grade level.

	Regards
		Henning

-- 
Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen          INTERMETA GmbH
hps@intermeta.de        +49 9131 50 654 0   http://www.intermeta.de/

RedHat Certified Engineer -- Jakarta Turbine Development  -- hero for hire
   Linux, Java, perl, Solaris -- Consulting, Training, Development

"Fighting for one's political stand is an honorable action, but re-
 fusing to acknowledge that there might be weaknesses in one's
 position - in order to identify them so that they can be remedied -
 is a large enough problem with the Open Source movement that it
 deserves to be on this list of the top five problems."
                       -- Michelle Levesque, "Fundamental Issues with
                                    Open Source Software Development"

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