You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@aries.apache.org by Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org> on 2010/08/31 22:08:44 UTC
The name of the util module (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries
(Incubating) version 0.2-incubating release candidate 05)
On 31 August 2010 20:11, Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alasdair
>
> All right, I was not super clear. :-(
>
> I am not referring to the artifactId, I was referring to the directory
> name, it is util in trunk, while we have it as
> org.apache.aries.util-0.2-incubating in our tag -
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/
>
> It just looks a bit weird that all the other directories don't start
> with org.apache.aries, while this one is and I was not able to find it
> in the first place.
It's consistent with the pattern: modules that build bundles have an
artifactId of the bundle symbolic name; and it's consistent with the
pattern that those modules have simple names (e.g. util,
blueprint-api, jpa-container). I think the oddness is that it's the
exception to the rule: releasable modules (i.e. first level down from
the aries/trunk) have a simple name.
We could push it down a directory level so util -> util/util-for-real
then we could have 'util-0.x-incubating' and a bundle called
org.apache.aries.util-0.x-incubating in that. In fact util
could/should be split into API/implementation bundles which would
definitely warrant moving it down a level in the directory structure.
>
> Lin
>
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Alasdair Nottingham <no...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Lin,
>>
>> The artifactid in trunk is org.apache.aries.util in trunk for me, have I missed something?
>>
>> Alasdair
>>
>> On 31 Aug 2010, at 17:59, Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1. Able to build it successfully.
>>>
>>> One minor thing I did notice was the name for the util module isn't
>>> consistent. It is org.apache.aries.util-0.2-incubating instead of
>>> util which is what we have in trunk.
>>>
>>> Thanks Zoe for putting this together!
>>>
>>> Lin
>>> On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 12:38 PM, zoe slattery <zo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I've staged a release candidate for Aries 0.2-incubating. The
>>>> following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/
>>>>
>>>> *NOTE* The only module that has changed since RC04 is jmx.
>>>>
>>>> The artifacts are in 5 staged repos. Links to the *.zip files for each
>>>> module are provided below.
>>>>
>>>> Modules staged at
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-113/
>>>> are:
>>>>
>>>> parent
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-113/org/apache/aries/parent/0.2-incubating/parent-0.2-incubating-source-release.zip
>>>>
>>>> eba-maven-plugin
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-113/org/apache/aries/eba-maven-plugin/0.2-incubating/eba-maven-plugin-0.2-incubating-source-release.zip
>>>>
>>>> testsupport
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-113/org/apache/aries/testsupport/testsupport/0.2-incubating/testsupport-0.2-incubating-source-release.zip
>>>>
>>>> org.apache.aries.util
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-113/org/apache/aries/org.apache.aries.util/0.2-incubating/org.apache.aries.util-0.2-incubating-source-release.zip
>>>>
>>>> web
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-113/org/apache/aries/web/web/0.2-incubating/web-0.2-incubating-source-release.zip
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Modules staged at
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-129/
>>>> are:
>>>>
>>>> quiesce
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-129/org/apache/aries/quiesce/quiesce/0.2-incubating/quiesce-0.2-incubating-source-release.zip
>>>>
>>>> jndi
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-129/org/apache/aries/jndi/jndi/0.2-incubating/jndi-0.2-incubating-source-release.zip
>>>>
>>>> transaction
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-129/org/apache/aries/transaction/transaction/0.2-incubating/transaction-0.2-incubating-source-release.zip
>>>>
>>>> application
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-129/org/apache/aries/application/application/0.2-incubating/application-0.2-incubating-source-release.zip
>>>>
>>>> samples
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-129/org/apache/aries/samples/samples/0.2-incubating/samples-0.2-incubating-source-release.zip
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Modules staged at
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-138/ are:
>>>>
>>>> jpa
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-138/org/apache/aries/jpa/jpa/0.2-incubating/jpa-0.2-incubating-source-release.zip
>>>>
>>>> Modules staged at
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-152/ are:
>>>> blueprint
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-152/org/apache/aries/blueprint/blueprint/0.2-incubating/blueprint-0.2-incubating-source-release.zip
>>>>
>>>> Modules staged at
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-153/ are:
>>>> jmx
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-153/org/apache/aries/jmx/jmx/0.2-incubating/
>>>> jmx-0.2-incubating-source-release.zip
>>>> <https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-153/org/apache/aries/jmx/jmx/0.2-incubating/jmx-0.2-incubating-source-release.zip>
>>>>
>>>> The RAT and IANAL build checks passed. Note that, although RAT is configured
>>>> to ignore *.MF and other files that do not require the ASF licence, theses
>>>> files are still reported incorrectly as RAT failures.
>>>>
>>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1
>>>> [ ] +0
>>>> [ ] -1
>>>>
>>
>
Re: The name of the util module (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) version 0.2-incubating release candidate 05)
Posted by Alasdair Nottingham <no...@apache.org>.
I agree
Alasdair
On 1 Sep 2010, at 15:17, Joe Bohn <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> IMO we should only push it down a level if in fact we split it into multiple bundles.
>
> Joe
>
>
> On 9/1/10 9:58 AM, Lin Sun wrote:
>> Yes it is consistent with the pattern but it is not obvious to me at
>> the first glance :-( It is good at least now I understand why there
>> is the difference!
>>
>> I agree push it down a directory level is more consistent with what we
>> have in trunk.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Lin
>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Jeremy Hughes<hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> It's consistent with the pattern: modules that build bundles have an
>>> artifactId of the bundle symbolic name; and it's consistent with the
>>> pattern that those modules have simple names (e.g. util,
>>> blueprint-api, jpa-container). I think the oddness is that it's the
>>> exception to the rule: releasable modules (i.e. first level down from
>>> the aries/trunk) have a simple name.
>>>
>>> We could push it down a directory level so util -> util/util-for-real
>>> then we could have 'util-0.x-incubating' and a bundle called
>>> org.apache.aries.util-0.x-incubating in that. In fact util
>>> could/should be split into API/implementation bundles which would
>>> definitely warrant moving it down a level in the directory structure.
>>
>
>
> --
> Joe
Re: The name of the util module (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating)
version 0.2-incubating release candidate 05)
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@gmail.com>.
IMO we should only push it down a level if in fact we split it into
multiple bundles.
Joe
On 9/1/10 9:58 AM, Lin Sun wrote:
> Yes it is consistent with the pattern but it is not obvious to me at
> the first glance :-( It is good at least now I understand why there
> is the difference!
>
> I agree push it down a directory level is more consistent with what we
> have in trunk.
>
> Thanks
>
> Lin
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Jeremy Hughes<hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> It's consistent with the pattern: modules that build bundles have an
>> artifactId of the bundle symbolic name; and it's consistent with the
>> pattern that those modules have simple names (e.g. util,
>> blueprint-api, jpa-container). I think the oddness is that it's the
>> exception to the rule: releasable modules (i.e. first level down from
>> the aries/trunk) have a simple name.
>>
>> We could push it down a directory level so util -> util/util-for-real
>> then we could have 'util-0.x-incubating' and a bundle called
>> org.apache.aries.util-0.x-incubating in that. In fact util
>> could/should be split into API/implementation bundles which would
>> definitely warrant moving it down a level in the directory structure.
>
--
Joe
Re: The name of the util module (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries
(Incubating) version 0.2-incubating release candidate 05)
Posted by Lin Sun <li...@gmail.com>.
Yes it is consistent with the pattern but it is not obvious to me at
the first glance :-( It is good at least now I understand why there
is the difference!
I agree push it down a directory level is more consistent with what we
have in trunk.
Thanks
Lin
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org> wrote:
> It's consistent with the pattern: modules that build bundles have an
> artifactId of the bundle symbolic name; and it's consistent with the
> pattern that those modules have simple names (e.g. util,
> blueprint-api, jpa-container). I think the oddness is that it's the
> exception to the rule: releasable modules (i.e. first level down from
> the aries/trunk) have a simple name.
>
> We could push it down a directory level so util -> util/util-for-real
> then we could have 'util-0.x-incubating' and a bundle called
> org.apache.aries.util-0.x-incubating in that. In fact util
> could/should be split into API/implementation bundles which would
> definitely warrant moving it down a level in the directory structure.