You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@felix.apache.org by "Richard S. Hall" <he...@ungoverned.org> on 2006/05/29 13:14:28 UTC

Upcoming votes

I am trying to keep track of the upcoming votes that we need. As far as 
I can see, we have the following:

   1. JMX contribution from INSA-LYON.
   2. JMX contribution from DIT UPM.
   3. Log Service contribution from Dale Peakall.
   4. Repository restructuring using artifactId.

Are there any others that I am missing at this point?

Are there any issues surrounding any of these that needs to be discussed?

-> richard

Re: Upcoming votes

Posted by "Richard S. Hall" <he...@ungoverned.org>.
This message is just a reminder to myself to add the Felix Commons 
proposal to the list of upcoming votes. :-)

-> richard

Richard S. Hall wrote:
> I am trying to keep track of the upcoming votes that we need. As far 
> as I can see, we have the following:
>
>   1. JMX contribution from INSA-LYON.
>   2. JMX contribution from DIT UPM.
>   3. Log Service contribution from Dale Peakall.
>   4. Repository restructuring using artifactId.
>
> Are there any others that I am missing at this point?
>
> Are there any issues surrounding any of these that needs to be discussed?
>
> -> richard
>

Re: Repository restructure (Was: Re: Upcoming votes)

Posted by "Richard S. Hall" <he...@ungoverned.org>.
Trygve Laugstøl wrote:
> Richard S. Hall wrote:
>> Regarding (4), I would like to move on this as quickly as possible. 
>> To some degree it is tied to our discussion on bundle JAR file 
>> naming. However, we can ignore that issue for now and just rename the 
>> repository subproject directories and not change the artifactId until 
>> we have made a decision about how we want to handle that.
>
> With my Maven hat on I would recommend that the directory name is the 
> same as the artifact id. Making them the same it will make your life 
> easier because Maven will usually append the artifact id on the site, 
> and scm urls.

Hmm. Well, if that is the case, then I guess we just have to decide if 
we can live with the ramifications of having short JAR names. I know I 
can. :-)

-> richard

Re: Repository restructure (Was: Re: Upcoming votes)

Posted by Trygve Laugstøl <tr...@apache.org>.
Richard S. Hall wrote:
> Richard S. Hall wrote:
> 
>> I am trying to keep track of the upcoming votes that we need. As far 
>> as I can see, we have the following:
>>
>>   1. JMX contribution from INSA-LYON.
>>   2. JMX contribution from DIT UPM.
>>   3. Log Service contribution from Dale Peakall.
>>   4. Repository restructuring using artifactId.
>>
>> Are there any others that I am missing at this point?
>>
>> Are there any issues surrounding any of these that needs to be discussed?
> 
> 
> Regarding (4), I would like to move on this as quickly as possible. To 
> some degree it is tied to our discussion on bundle JAR file naming. 
> However, we can ignore that issue for now and just rename the repository 
> subproject directories and not change the artifactId until we have made 
> a decision about how we want to handle that.

With my Maven hat on I would recommend that the directory name is the 
same as the artifact id. Making them the same it will make your life 
easier because Maven will usually append the artifact id on the site, 
and scm urls.

--
Trygve

Re: Repository restructure (Was: Re: Upcoming votes)

Posted by Enrique Rodriguez <en...@gmail.com>.
Richard S. Hall wrote:
> Richard S. Hall wrote:
>> I am trying to keep track of the upcoming votes that we need. As far 
>> as I can see, we have the following:
>>
>>   1. JMX contribution from INSA-LYON.
>>   2. JMX contribution from DIT UPM.
>>   3. Log Service contribution from Dale Peakall.
>>   4. Repository restructuring using artifactId.
>>
>> Are there any others that I am missing at this point?
>>
>> Are there any issues surrounding any of these that needs to be discussed?
> 
> Regarding (4), I would like to move on this as quickly as possible. To 
> some degree it is tied to our discussion on bundle JAR file naming. 
> However, we can ignore that issue for now and just rename the repository 
> subproject directories and not change the artifactId until we have made 
> a decision about how we want to handle that.
> 
> If everyone agrees on deferring the artifactId discussion, then we can 
> call a vote on this right away.

This is a long (3-day) weekend in the US so some people might object if 
they miss a day due to vacation and the last couple days of discussion. 
  There are maybe 4-5 people, at least, on the PPMC in the US.

I recommend starting the vote at the earliest tomorrow (Tuesday).

Enrique

Repository restructure (Was: Re: Upcoming votes)

Posted by "Richard S. Hall" <he...@ungoverned.org>.
Richard S. Hall wrote:
> I am trying to keep track of the upcoming votes that we need. As far 
> as I can see, we have the following:
>
>   1. JMX contribution from INSA-LYON.
>   2. JMX contribution from DIT UPM.
>   3. Log Service contribution from Dale Peakall.
>   4. Repository restructuring using artifactId.
>
> Are there any others that I am missing at this point?
>
> Are there any issues surrounding any of these that needs to be discussed?

Regarding (4), I would like to move on this as quickly as possible. To 
some degree it is tied to our discussion on bundle JAR file naming. 
However, we can ignore that issue for now and just rename the repository 
subproject directories and not change the artifactId until we have made 
a decision about how we want to handle that.

If everyone agrees on deferring the artifactId discussion, then we can 
call a vote on this right away.

-> richard