You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@bval.apache.org by Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> on 2010/03/19 13:58:18 UTC
[DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
As part of the initial codebase bring up, we need to decide on what
package name we want to use in place of the current com.agimatec package
names.
Either of the following would allow us to easily replace "incubator"
with our TLP parent at graduation, like "commons" -
org.apache.incubator.beanvalidation
org.apache.incubator.bval
or, we could keep it simple for now and worry about renaming again at
graduation and go with one of -
org.apache.bval
org.apache.beanvalidation
Thoughts? I'll open a JIRA to use for the renaming once we decide....
-Donald
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 8:29 AM, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would avoid "incubator" in the package structure. 'bval' sounds good to me.
+1 on that
-M
>
> --kevan
> On Mar 19, 2010, at 8:58 AM, Donald Woods wrote:
>
>> As part of the initial codebase bring up, we need to decide on what
>> package name we want to use in place of the current com.agimatec package
>> names.
>>
>> Either of the following would allow us to easily replace "incubator"
>> with our TLP parent at graduation, like "commons" -
>> org.apache.incubator.beanvalidation
>> org.apache.incubator.bval
>> or, we could keep it simple for now and worry about renaming again at
>> graduation and go with one of -
>> org.apache.bval
>> org.apache.beanvalidation
>>
>>
>> Thoughts? I'll open a JIRA to use for the renaming once we decide....
>>
>>
>> -Donald
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>.
I would avoid "incubator" in the package structure. 'bval' sounds good to me.
--kevan
On Mar 19, 2010, at 8:58 AM, Donald Woods wrote:
> As part of the initial codebase bring up, we need to decide on what
> package name we want to use in place of the current com.agimatec package
> names.
>
> Either of the following would allow us to easily replace "incubator"
> with our TLP parent at graduation, like "commons" -
> org.apache.incubator.beanvalidation
> org.apache.incubator.bval
> or, we could keep it simple for now and worry about renaming again at
> graduation and go with one of -
> org.apache.bval
> org.apache.beanvalidation
>
>
> Thoughts? I'll open a JIRA to use for the renaming once we decide....
>
>
> -Donald
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Simone Tripodi <si...@gmail.com>.
Hi Roman,
thanks to you, you can't immagine how I was worried to have broken something! :D
Thanks a lot, have a nice day!
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Roman Stumm <ro...@gmx.de> wrote:
> Am 28.03.10 14:40, schrieb Simone Tripodi:
>>
>> Hi all guys,
>> package move has been done, I took advantage to update a small subset
>> of metadata on parent pom, according to new apache info.
>> Once terminated, I also reported the BVAL-11 issue that I wasn't able
>> to fix alone, as Kevan suggested I committed the code so the community
>> can help to resolve the issue.
>> One small question: is (agimatec) 0.9.6 version still fine for bval?
>> I'd propose to change it to 0.1-SNAPSHOT, how does it sound to you?
>> Best regards, have a nice Sunday!!!
>> Sim
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Simone Tripodi
>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi Donald,
>>> I 100% support your idea, I'd raise the same question once terminated
>>> this task :)
>>> Thanks for your hint, going to commit in a while!!! :)
>>> Have a nice Sunday,
>>> Simo
>>>
>>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 12:34 AM, Donald Woods<dw...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I was thinking about collapsing everything into one artifact. The
>>>> current code structure is because agimatec-validation contains the core
>>>> engine/metadata handler, which was shared with pre-JSR303 code that
>>>> Agimatec had, while the agimatec-jsr303 was the add-on layer to fulfill
>>>> the spec requirements.
>>>>
>>>> For now, lets rename the artifacts as:
>>>> agimatec-validation --> bval-core
>>>> agimatec-jsr303 --> bval-jsr303
>>>>
>>>> We'll use another JIRA to combine everything or BVAL-1 to split things
>>>> into an impl and api jar.....
>>>>
>>>> I'll try to take a look at the test failures tonight or tomorrow, but go
>>>> ahead with the commit and we'll figure it out from there.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Donald
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/27/10 1:14 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Kevan,
>>>>> thank you very much for your feedbacks!!! I'm going to commit the code
>>>>> at this status, I just need to know: if org.apache.bval fits well in
>>>>> groupId, which artifacts Id do we have to use? Do you have any
>>>>> suggestion?
>>>>> Thanks a lot!!!
>>>>> Simo
>>>>>
>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Kevan Miller<ke...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 27, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi all mates,
>>>>>>> I'm going to complete the issue but I need you help for 2 small
>>>>>>> issues I have:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) should I move also groupId and artifactId in poms?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, I definitely think so.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2) in the jsr-303 module I've 28 failures over 81 tests, I attached
>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>> this email the .txt junit reports, is anyone able to explain me why
>>>>>>> they fail so I can fix them?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, I really haven't looked at the code at all, yet... IMO, it's
>>>>>> absolutely fine for you to commit the code in it's current form. At this
>>>>>> stage, I don't think anyone would object that the code has test failures.
>>>>>> Plus committing will allow others to help out... No reason for this to be
>>>>>> solely on your shoulders.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for doing this!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --kevan
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> Hi Simone,
>
> thanks for renaming! I fixed Issue 11, so that all tests are successful now.
>
> Roman
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Simone Tripodi <si...@gmail.com>.
Hi Donald,
thanks a lot, so I'm going to modify it :)
All the best,
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> wrote:
> Yep, we should start with 0.1-SNAPSHOT, since we'll hopefully have
> several releases in incubator before we graduate.
>
>
> -Donald
>
>
> On 3/28/10 8:40 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>> Hi all guys,
>> package move has been done, I took advantage to update a small subset
>> of metadata on parent pom, according to new apache info.
>> Once terminated, I also reported the BVAL-11 issue that I wasn't able
>> to fix alone, as Kevan suggested I committed the code so the community
>> can help to resolve the issue.
>> One small question: is (agimatec) 0.9.6 version still fine for bval?
>> I'd propose to change it to 0.1-SNAPSHOT, how does it sound to you?
>> Best regards, have a nice Sunday!!!
>> Sim
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Simone Tripodi
>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Donald,
>>> I 100% support your idea, I'd raise the same question once terminated
>>> this task :)
>>> Thanks for your hint, going to commit in a while!!! :)
>>> Have a nice Sunday,
>>> Simo
>>>
>>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 12:34 AM, Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> I was thinking about collapsing everything into one artifact. The
>>>> current code structure is because agimatec-validation contains the core
>>>> engine/metadata handler, which was shared with pre-JSR303 code that
>>>> Agimatec had, while the agimatec-jsr303 was the add-on layer to fulfill
>>>> the spec requirements.
>>>>
>>>> For now, lets rename the artifacts as:
>>>> agimatec-validation --> bval-core
>>>> agimatec-jsr303 --> bval-jsr303
>>>>
>>>> We'll use another JIRA to combine everything or BVAL-1 to split things
>>>> into an impl and api jar.....
>>>>
>>>> I'll try to take a look at the test failures tonight or tomorrow, but go
>>>> ahead with the commit and we'll figure it out from there.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Donald
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/27/10 1:14 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>>>>> Hi Kevan,
>>>>> thank you very much for your feedbacks!!! I'm going to commit the code
>>>>> at this status, I just need to know: if org.apache.bval fits well in
>>>>> groupId, which artifacts Id do we have to use? Do you have any
>>>>> suggestion?
>>>>> Thanks a lot!!!
>>>>> Simo
>>>>>
>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 27, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi all mates,
>>>>>>> I'm going to complete the issue but I need you help for 2 small issues I have:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) should I move also groupId and artifactId in poms?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, I definitely think so.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2) in the jsr-303 module I've 28 failures over 81 tests, I attached on
>>>>>>> this email the .txt junit reports, is anyone able to explain me why
>>>>>>> they fail so I can fix them?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, I really haven't looked at the code at all, yet... IMO, it's absolutely fine for you to commit the code in it's current form. At this stage, I don't think anyone would object that the code has test failures. Plus committing will allow others to help out... No reason for this to be solely on your shoulders.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for doing this!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --kevan
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Roman Stumm <ro...@gmx.de>.
Am 28.03.10 14:40, schrieb Simone Tripodi:
> Hi all guys,
> package move has been done, I took advantage to update a small subset
> of metadata on parent pom, according to new apache info.
> Once terminated, I also reported the BVAL-11 issue that I wasn't able
> to fix alone, as Kevan suggested I committed the code so the community
> can help to resolve the issue.
> One small question: is (agimatec) 0.9.6 version still fine for bval?
> I'd propose to change it to 0.1-SNAPSHOT, how does it sound to you?
> Best regards, have a nice Sunday!!!
> Sim
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Simone Tripodi
> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Donald,
>> I 100% support your idea, I'd raise the same question once terminated
>> this task :)
>> Thanks for your hint, going to commit in a while!!! :)
>> Have a nice Sunday,
>> Simo
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 12:34 AM, Donald Woods<dw...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I was thinking about collapsing everything into one artifact. The
>>> current code structure is because agimatec-validation contains the core
>>> engine/metadata handler, which was shared with pre-JSR303 code that
>>> Agimatec had, while the agimatec-jsr303 was the add-on layer to fulfill
>>> the spec requirements.
>>>
>>> For now, lets rename the artifacts as:
>>> agimatec-validation --> bval-core
>>> agimatec-jsr303 --> bval-jsr303
>>>
>>> We'll use another JIRA to combine everything or BVAL-1 to split things
>>> into an impl and api jar.....
>>>
>>> I'll try to take a look at the test failures tonight or tomorrow, but go
>>> ahead with the commit and we'll figure it out from there.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Donald
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/27/10 1:14 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Kevan,
>>>> thank you very much for your feedbacks!!! I'm going to commit the code
>>>> at this status, I just need to know: if org.apache.bval fits well in
>>>> groupId, which artifacts Id do we have to use? Do you have any
>>>> suggestion?
>>>> Thanks a lot!!!
>>>> Simo
>>>>
>>>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Kevan Miller<ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 27, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all mates,
>>>>>> I'm going to complete the issue but I need you help for 2 small issues I have:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) should I move also groupId and artifactId in poms?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I definitely think so.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) in the jsr-303 module I've 28 failures over 81 tests, I attached on
>>>>>> this email the .txt junit reports, is anyone able to explain me why
>>>>>> they fail so I can fix them?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, I really haven't looked at the code at all, yet... IMO, it's absolutely fine for you to commit the code in it's current form. At this stage, I don't think anyone would object that the code has test failures. Plus committing will allow others to help out... No reason for this to be solely on your shoulders.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for doing this!
>>>>>
>>>>> --kevan
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
Hi Simone,
thanks for renaming! I fixed Issue 11, so that all tests are successful now.
Roman
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org>.
Yep, we should start with 0.1-SNAPSHOT, since we'll hopefully have
several releases in incubator before we graduate.
-Donald
On 3/28/10 8:40 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi all guys,
> package move has been done, I took advantage to update a small subset
> of metadata on parent pom, according to new apache info.
> Once terminated, I also reported the BVAL-11 issue that I wasn't able
> to fix alone, as Kevan suggested I committed the code so the community
> can help to resolve the issue.
> One small question: is (agimatec) 0.9.6 version still fine for bval?
> I'd propose to change it to 0.1-SNAPSHOT, how does it sound to you?
> Best regards, have a nice Sunday!!!
> Sim
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Simone Tripodi
> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Donald,
>> I 100% support your idea, I'd raise the same question once terminated
>> this task :)
>> Thanks for your hint, going to commit in a while!!! :)
>> Have a nice Sunday,
>> Simo
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 12:34 AM, Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> I was thinking about collapsing everything into one artifact. The
>>> current code structure is because agimatec-validation contains the core
>>> engine/metadata handler, which was shared with pre-JSR303 code that
>>> Agimatec had, while the agimatec-jsr303 was the add-on layer to fulfill
>>> the spec requirements.
>>>
>>> For now, lets rename the artifacts as:
>>> agimatec-validation --> bval-core
>>> agimatec-jsr303 --> bval-jsr303
>>>
>>> We'll use another JIRA to combine everything or BVAL-1 to split things
>>> into an impl and api jar.....
>>>
>>> I'll try to take a look at the test failures tonight or tomorrow, but go
>>> ahead with the commit and we'll figure it out from there.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Donald
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/27/10 1:14 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>>>> Hi Kevan,
>>>> thank you very much for your feedbacks!!! I'm going to commit the code
>>>> at this status, I just need to know: if org.apache.bval fits well in
>>>> groupId, which artifacts Id do we have to use? Do you have any
>>>> suggestion?
>>>> Thanks a lot!!!
>>>> Simo
>>>>
>>>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 27, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all mates,
>>>>>> I'm going to complete the issue but I need you help for 2 small issues I have:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) should I move also groupId and artifactId in poms?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I definitely think so.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) in the jsr-303 module I've 28 failures over 81 tests, I attached on
>>>>>> this email the .txt junit reports, is anyone able to explain me why
>>>>>> they fail so I can fix them?
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, I really haven't looked at the code at all, yet... IMO, it's absolutely fine for you to commit the code in it's current form. At this stage, I don't think anyone would object that the code has test failures. Plus committing will allow others to help out... No reason for this to be solely on your shoulders.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for doing this!
>>>>>
>>>>> --kevan
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Simone Tripodi <si...@gmail.com>.
Hi all guys,
package move has been done, I took advantage to update a small subset
of metadata on parent pom, according to new apache info.
Once terminated, I also reported the BVAL-11 issue that I wasn't able
to fix alone, as Kevan suggested I committed the code so the community
can help to resolve the issue.
One small question: is (agimatec) 0.9.6 version still fine for bval?
I'd propose to change it to 0.1-SNAPSHOT, how does it sound to you?
Best regards, have a nice Sunday!!!
Sim
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Simone Tripodi
<si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Donald,
> I 100% support your idea, I'd raise the same question once terminated
> this task :)
> Thanks for your hint, going to commit in a while!!! :)
> Have a nice Sunday,
> Simo
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 12:34 AM, Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> wrote:
>> I was thinking about collapsing everything into one artifact. The
>> current code structure is because agimatec-validation contains the core
>> engine/metadata handler, which was shared with pre-JSR303 code that
>> Agimatec had, while the agimatec-jsr303 was the add-on layer to fulfill
>> the spec requirements.
>>
>> For now, lets rename the artifacts as:
>> agimatec-validation --> bval-core
>> agimatec-jsr303 --> bval-jsr303
>>
>> We'll use another JIRA to combine everything or BVAL-1 to split things
>> into an impl and api jar.....
>>
>> I'll try to take a look at the test failures tonight or tomorrow, but go
>> ahead with the commit and we'll figure it out from there.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Donald
>>
>>
>> On 3/27/10 1:14 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>>> Hi Kevan,
>>> thank you very much for your feedbacks!!! I'm going to commit the code
>>> at this status, I just need to know: if org.apache.bval fits well in
>>> groupId, which artifacts Id do we have to use? Do you have any
>>> suggestion?
>>> Thanks a lot!!!
>>> Simo
>>>
>>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 27, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all mates,
>>>>> I'm going to complete the issue but I need you help for 2 small issues I have:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) should I move also groupId and artifactId in poms?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I definitely think so.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) in the jsr-303 module I've 28 failures over 81 tests, I attached on
>>>>> this email the .txt junit reports, is anyone able to explain me why
>>>>> they fail so I can fix them?
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, I really haven't looked at the code at all, yet... IMO, it's absolutely fine for you to commit the code in it's current form. At this stage, I don't think anyone would object that the code has test failures. Plus committing will allow others to help out... No reason for this to be solely on your shoulders.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for doing this!
>>>>
>>>> --kevan
>>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Simone Tripodi <si...@gmail.com>.
Hi Donald,
I 100% support your idea, I'd raise the same question once terminated
this task :)
Thanks for your hint, going to commit in a while!!! :)
Have a nice Sunday,
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 12:34 AM, Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> wrote:
> I was thinking about collapsing everything into one artifact. The
> current code structure is because agimatec-validation contains the core
> engine/metadata handler, which was shared with pre-JSR303 code that
> Agimatec had, while the agimatec-jsr303 was the add-on layer to fulfill
> the spec requirements.
>
> For now, lets rename the artifacts as:
> agimatec-validation --> bval-core
> agimatec-jsr303 --> bval-jsr303
>
> We'll use another JIRA to combine everything or BVAL-1 to split things
> into an impl and api jar.....
>
> I'll try to take a look at the test failures tonight or tomorrow, but go
> ahead with the commit and we'll figure it out from there.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Donald
>
>
> On 3/27/10 1:14 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>> Hi Kevan,
>> thank you very much for your feedbacks!!! I'm going to commit the code
>> at this status, I just need to know: if org.apache.bval fits well in
>> groupId, which artifacts Id do we have to use? Do you have any
>> suggestion?
>> Thanks a lot!!!
>> Simo
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mar 27, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all mates,
>>>> I'm going to complete the issue but I need you help for 2 small issues I have:
>>>>
>>>> 1) should I move also groupId and artifactId in poms?
>>>
>>> Yes, I definitely think so.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2) in the jsr-303 module I've 28 failures over 81 tests, I attached on
>>>> this email the .txt junit reports, is anyone able to explain me why
>>>> they fail so I can fix them?
>>>
>>> Sorry, I really haven't looked at the code at all, yet... IMO, it's absolutely fine for you to commit the code in it's current form. At this stage, I don't think anyone would object that the code has test failures. Plus committing will allow others to help out... No reason for this to be solely on your shoulders.
>>>
>>> Thanks for doing this!
>>>
>>> --kevan
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org>.
I was thinking about collapsing everything into one artifact. The
current code structure is because agimatec-validation contains the core
engine/metadata handler, which was shared with pre-JSR303 code that
Agimatec had, while the agimatec-jsr303 was the add-on layer to fulfill
the spec requirements.
For now, lets rename the artifacts as:
agimatec-validation --> bval-core
agimatec-jsr303 --> bval-jsr303
We'll use another JIRA to combine everything or BVAL-1 to split things
into an impl and api jar.....
I'll try to take a look at the test failures tonight or tomorrow, but go
ahead with the commit and we'll figure it out from there.
Thanks,
Donald
On 3/27/10 1:14 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi Kevan,
> thank you very much for your feedbacks!!! I'm going to commit the code
> at this status, I just need to know: if org.apache.bval fits well in
> groupId, which artifacts Id do we have to use? Do you have any
> suggestion?
> Thanks a lot!!!
> Simo
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 27, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all mates,
>>> I'm going to complete the issue but I need you help for 2 small issues I have:
>>>
>>> 1) should I move also groupId and artifactId in poms?
>>
>> Yes, I definitely think so.
>>
>>>
>>> 2) in the jsr-303 module I've 28 failures over 81 tests, I attached on
>>> this email the .txt junit reports, is anyone able to explain me why
>>> they fail so I can fix them?
>>
>> Sorry, I really haven't looked at the code at all, yet... IMO, it's absolutely fine for you to commit the code in it's current form. At this stage, I don't think anyone would object that the code has test failures. Plus committing will allow others to help out... No reason for this to be solely on your shoulders.
>>
>> Thanks for doing this!
>>
>> --kevan
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Simone Tripodi <si...@gmail.com>.
Hi Kevan,
thank you very much for your feedbacks!!! I'm going to commit the code
at this status, I just need to know: if org.apache.bval fits well in
groupId, which artifacts Id do we have to use? Do you have any
suggestion?
Thanks a lot!!!
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 27, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>
>> Hi all mates,
>> I'm going to complete the issue but I need you help for 2 small issues I have:
>>
>> 1) should I move also groupId and artifactId in poms?
>
> Yes, I definitely think so.
>
>>
>> 2) in the jsr-303 module I've 28 failures over 81 tests, I attached on
>> this email the .txt junit reports, is anyone able to explain me why
>> they fail so I can fix them?
>
> Sorry, I really haven't looked at the code at all, yet... IMO, it's absolutely fine for you to commit the code in it's current form. At this stage, I don't think anyone would object that the code has test failures. Plus committing will allow others to help out... No reason for this to be solely on your shoulders.
>
> Thanks for doing this!
>
> --kevan
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>.
On Mar 27, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi all mates,
> I'm going to complete the issue but I need you help for 2 small issues I have:
>
> 1) should I move also groupId and artifactId in poms?
Yes, I definitely think so.
>
> 2) in the jsr-303 module I've 28 failures over 81 tests, I attached on
> this email the .txt junit reports, is anyone able to explain me why
> they fail so I can fix them?
Sorry, I really haven't looked at the code at all, yet... IMO, it's absolutely fine for you to commit the code in it's current form. At this stage, I don't think anyone would object that the code has test failures. Plus committing will allow others to help out... No reason for this to be solely on your shoulders.
Thanks for doing this!
--kevan
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Simone Tripodi <si...@gmail.com>.
Hi all mates,
I'm going to complete the issue but I need you help for 2 small issues I have:
1) should I move also groupId and artifactId in poms?
2) in the jsr-303 module I've 28 failures over 81 tests, I attached on
this email the .txt junit reports, is anyone able to explain me why
they fail so I can fix them?
Like always, thanks a lot in advance!!!
All the best, have a nice weekend,
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Simone Tripodi
<si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Donald,
> thanks for the hints, very appreciated!!! I'll let you know if I'll
> find some difficulties before to commit.
> Thanks, have a nice day!
> Simo
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Try to keep any reformatting separate from the package renaming.
>>
>> Also, if you use Eclipse to rename the packages, most everything should
>> work, except the services file will need to get updated to point to the
>> new provider classname. There might be a couple junits that need manual
>> updating too....
>>
>>
>> -Donald
>>
>>
>> On 3/25/10 12:42 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>>> Hi Kevan,
>>> thanks a lot for your reply! I assigned the issue to me and soon I'll
>>> commit the new package!!!
>>> Have a nice day, best regards!
>>> Simo
>>>
>>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 25, 2010, at 4:44 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all guys,
>>>>> if everybody agree I can take care about moving the code in the new
>>>>> package, just to avoid 2 or more committers are doing the same thing
>>>>> at the same time.
>>>>> Please let me know and thanks a lot in advance :)
>>>>
>>>> Hi Simone,
>>>> Sounds great! I think you can assume you have the token and start the work. Go ahead and assign the Jira to yourself -- which hopefully a good indicator that nobody else is working on it...
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> --kevan
>>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Simone Tripodi <si...@gmail.com>.
Hi Donald,
thanks for the hints, very appreciated!!! I'll let you know if I'll
find some difficulties before to commit.
Thanks, have a nice day!
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> wrote:
> Try to keep any reformatting separate from the package renaming.
>
> Also, if you use Eclipse to rename the packages, most everything should
> work, except the services file will need to get updated to point to the
> new provider classname. There might be a couple junits that need manual
> updating too....
>
>
> -Donald
>
>
> On 3/25/10 12:42 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>> Hi Kevan,
>> thanks a lot for your reply! I assigned the issue to me and soon I'll
>> commit the new package!!!
>> Have a nice day, best regards!
>> Simo
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mar 25, 2010, at 4:44 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all guys,
>>>> if everybody agree I can take care about moving the code in the new
>>>> package, just to avoid 2 or more committers are doing the same thing
>>>> at the same time.
>>>> Please let me know and thanks a lot in advance :)
>>>
>>> Hi Simone,
>>> Sounds great! I think you can assume you have the token and start the work. Go ahead and assign the Jira to yourself -- which hopefully a good indicator that nobody else is working on it...
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> --kevan
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org>.
Try to keep any reformatting separate from the package renaming.
Also, if you use Eclipse to rename the packages, most everything should
work, except the services file will need to get updated to point to the
new provider classname. There might be a couple junits that need manual
updating too....
-Donald
On 3/25/10 12:42 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi Kevan,
> thanks a lot for your reply! I assigned the issue to me and soon I'll
> commit the new package!!!
> Have a nice day, best regards!
> Simo
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 25, 2010, at 4:44 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all guys,
>>> if everybody agree I can take care about moving the code in the new
>>> package, just to avoid 2 or more committers are doing the same thing
>>> at the same time.
>>> Please let me know and thanks a lot in advance :)
>>
>> Hi Simone,
>> Sounds great! I think you can assume you have the token and start the work. Go ahead and assign the Jira to yourself -- which hopefully a good indicator that nobody else is working on it...
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> --kevan
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Simone Tripodi <si...@gmail.com>.
Hi Kevan,
thanks a lot for your reply! I assigned the issue to me and soon I'll
commit the new package!!!
Have a nice day, best regards!
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 25, 2010, at 4:44 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>
>> Hi all guys,
>> if everybody agree I can take care about moving the code in the new
>> package, just to avoid 2 or more committers are doing the same thing
>> at the same time.
>> Please let me know and thanks a lot in advance :)
>
> Hi Simone,
> Sounds great! I think you can assume you have the token and start the work. Go ahead and assign the Jira to yourself -- which hopefully a good indicator that nobody else is working on it...
>
> Thanks!
>
> --kevan
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>.
On Mar 25, 2010, at 4:44 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi all guys,
> if everybody agree I can take care about moving the code in the new
> package, just to avoid 2 or more committers are doing the same thing
> at the same time.
> Please let me know and thanks a lot in advance :)
Hi Simone,
Sounds great! I think you can assume you have the token and start the work. Go ahead and assign the Jira to yourself -- which hopefully a good indicator that nobody else is working on it...
Thanks!
--kevan
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Simone Tripodi <si...@gmail.com>.
Hi all guys,
if everybody agree I can take care about moving the code in the new
package, just to avoid 2 or more committers are doing the same thing
at the same time.
Please let me know and thanks a lot in advance :)
Have a nice day!!!
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> wrote:
> OK, sounds like org.apache.bval is the overwhelming consensus, so I'll
> update the JIRA to reflect that. Thanks everyone for your input!
>
>
> -Donald
>
>
> On 3/19/10 8:58 AM, Donald Woods wrote:
>> As part of the initial codebase bring up, we need to decide on what
>> package name we want to use in place of the current com.agimatec package
>> names.
>>
>> Either of the following would allow us to easily replace "incubator"
>> with our TLP parent at graduation, like "commons" -
>> org.apache.incubator.beanvalidation
>> org.apache.incubator.bval
>> or, we could keep it simple for now and worry about renaming again at
>> graduation and go with one of -
>> org.apache.bval
>> org.apache.beanvalidation
>>
>>
>> Thoughts? I'll open a JIRA to use for the renaming once we decide....
>>
>>
>> -Donald
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org>.
OK, sounds like org.apache.bval is the overwhelming consensus, so I'll
update the JIRA to reflect that. Thanks everyone for your input!
-Donald
On 3/19/10 8:58 AM, Donald Woods wrote:
> As part of the initial codebase bring up, we need to decide on what
> package name we want to use in place of the current com.agimatec package
> names.
>
> Either of the following would allow us to easily replace "incubator"
> with our TLP parent at graduation, like "commons" -
> org.apache.incubator.beanvalidation
> org.apache.incubator.bval
> or, we could keep it simple for now and worry about renaming again at
> graduation and go with one of -
> org.apache.bval
> org.apache.beanvalidation
>
>
> Thoughts? I'll open a JIRA to use for the renaming once we decide....
>
>
> -Donald
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>.
+1
regards,
gerhard
http://www.irian.at
Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German
Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
2010/3/19 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>
> +1 for org.apache.bval
>
> most simple version, and plays well with our jira namespace too.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> --- Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> schrieb am Fr, 19.3.2010:
>
> > Von: Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org>
> > Betreff: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
> > An: bval-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Datum: Freitag, 19. März, 2010 13:58 Uhr
> > As part of the initial codebase bring
> > up, we need to decide on what
> > package name we want to use in place of the current
> > com.agimatec package
> > names.
> >
> > Either of the following would allow us to easily replace
> > "incubator"
> > with our TLP parent at graduation, like "commons" -
> > org.apache.incubator.beanvalidation
> > org.apache.incubator.bval
> > or, we could keep it simple for now and worry about
> > renaming again at
> > graduation and go with one of -
> > org.apache.bval
> > org.apache.beanvalidation
> >
> >
> > Thoughts? I'll open a JIRA to use for the renaming
> > once we decide....
> >
> >
> > -Donald
> >
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz
> gegen Massenmails.
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Simone Tripodi <si...@gmail.com>.
+1 for org.apache.bval too, according to other name convention already
in use like mailing-lists and jira namespace :P
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 2:36 PM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> +1 for org.apache.bval
>
> most simple version, and plays well with our jira namespace too.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> --- Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> schrieb am Fr, 19.3.2010:
>
>> Von: Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org>
>> Betreff: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
>> An: bval-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Datum: Freitag, 19. März, 2010 13:58 Uhr
>> As part of the initial codebase bring
>> up, we need to decide on what
>> package name we want to use in place of the current
>> com.agimatec package
>> names.
>>
>> Either of the following would allow us to easily replace
>> "incubator"
>> with our TLP parent at graduation, like "commons" -
>> org.apache.incubator.beanvalidation
>> org.apache.incubator.bval
>> or, we could keep it simple for now and worry about
>> renaming again at
>> graduation and go with one of -
>> org.apache.bval
>> org.apache.beanvalidation
>>
>>
>> Thoughts? I'll open a JIRA to use for the renaming
>> once we decide....
>>
>>
>> -Donald
>>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz gegen Massenmails.
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
AW: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
Posted by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>.
+1 for org.apache.bval
most simple version, and plays well with our jira namespace too.
LieGrue,
strub
--- Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> schrieb am Fr, 19.3.2010:
> Von: Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org>
> Betreff: [DISCUSS] Package naming of incoming codebase
> An: bval-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Datum: Freitag, 19. März, 2010 13:58 Uhr
> As part of the initial codebase bring
> up, we need to decide on what
> package name we want to use in place of the current
> com.agimatec package
> names.
>
> Either of the following would allow us to easily replace
> "incubator"
> with our TLP parent at graduation, like "commons" -
> org.apache.incubator.beanvalidation
> org.apache.incubator.bval
> or, we could keep it simple for now and worry about
> renaming again at
> graduation and go with one of -
> org.apache.bval
> org.apache.beanvalidation
>
>
> Thoughts? I'll open a JIRA to use for the renaming
> once we decide....
>
>
> -Donald
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz gegen Massenmails.
http://mail.yahoo.com