You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@wicket.apache.org by Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com> on 2008/11/24 19:13:13 UTC
[VOTE] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Hello everyone,
I would like to get your opinion on an idea regarding the Wicket Stuff
project(s). As you are familiar with, Wicket Stuff is where anyone can
create anything related to Wicket, small or large. One problem that new
users of Wicket (and us "old" users) come across is that there is a lot of
stuff in there, and not all of it is well maintained, and there aren't
specific releases of many of the projects. So, you have to build it
yourself and figure out which version matches which Wicket version, etc...
What I would like to know is if everyone thinks it would be good to have a
subset of WS projects that are structured in a way that they are always in
sync with the Wicket versions. IOW, there would be two branches - 1.3.X and
1.4 (trunk), just like Wicket has. There would be a parent module and all
of the modules that wanted to participate would be structured under it.
They would all release in sync with Wicket. For instance, when Wicket
releases 1.4-RC2, we would cut a release of this wicket-stuff-structured
(bad name) and all of the projects under it at 1.4-RC2. I haven't yet
figured out how interim releases would work (new features are added to a WS
project and it wants to cut a release between wicket releases) or if that
matters.
This would not have to effect all WS projects - someone could continue to
add projects to WS just like they do today. This would simply create a
sub-tree of projects that are in the structured / scheduled release area.
For those that don't want to be part of that structure, they could continue
operating as they do today.
So, here's the vote:
[ ] - NO! We should leave Wicket Stuff like it is - a free-for-all with no
structure
[ ] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff projects
structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is produced for each
Wicket release.
[ ] - Maybe - I have a better idea (perfect!)
Also - please add the following:
1 - Would you be interested in helping to maintain such a thing. (If we had
two or three of the owners of the larger projects on board, I don't think it
would be too hard to keep the codebase of this in sync with Wicket core.)
2 - What projects do you own (and by your vote we'll see if you want those
projects to be included in this restructuring).
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com
Re: [discuss] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>.
Great work! Its really looking good!
Two more suggestions:
1. Add the maven-jetty-plugin the the root pom. It would be nice if
'mvn jetty:run' works for all the examples.
2. Remove all eclipse projects (.project .classpath) from svn and add
the 'maven-eclipse-plugin' to the root project.
I can make patches for these changes if you like... but i'm not
totally clear on the etiquette for wicketstuff. Is someone (you?)
allowed to apply a patch that affects build for many projects?
ryan
On Nov 30, 2008, at 1:16 AM, Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
> PS - Good suggestion - this was included. Take a look at:
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-core
>
> --
> Jeremy Thomerson
> http://www.wickettraining.com
>
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I don't know if this has already been discussed, but another part
>> of the
>> cleanup that would be nice is to group the main project and the
>> example
>> project into a folder with a common parent pom.
>>
>> For example, I find the layout of:
>>
>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/inmethod-grid/
>>
>> much easier to use/maintain then the apparent standard of
>> /wicketstuff-project & /wicketstuff-project-example
>>
>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push/
>>
>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push-examples/
>>
>> one key thing about this change is that mvn eclipse:eclipse makes the
>> example project depend on the core project
>>
>> perhaps this could be added to the 'organize' task?
>>
>> ryan
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: [discuss] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com>.
PS - Good suggestion - this was included. Take a look at:
https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-core
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't know if this has already been discussed, but another part of the
> cleanup that would be nice is to group the main project and the example
> project into a folder with a common parent pom.
>
> For example, I find the layout of:
>
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/inmethod-grid/
>
> much easier to use/maintain then the apparent standard of
> /wicketstuff-project & /wicketstuff-project-example
>
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push/
>
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push-examples/
>
> one key thing about this change is that mvn eclipse:eclipse makes the
> example project depend on the core project
>
> perhaps this could be added to the 'organize' task?
>
> ryan
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
Re: [discuss] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Jurek Piasek <ju...@gmail.com>.
It is easy to vote yes to this.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 5:55 PM, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>wrote:
> But, here you have to assume it was released from the trunk (which I guess
> you can ascertain from the pom's SVN url). I'm not saying this information
> isn't useful. I'm just saying it doesn't give you the whole picture by
> itself. I was unaware of this plugin, but I do believe I'll add it to our
> build cycle. Thanks for the tip!
>
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 4:18 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Right, the svn url is important especially when you deploy from
> > 'non-released' versions (like most of wicketstuff)
> >
> > This is what I have in my pom.xml
> >
> >
> > <plugin>
> > <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
> > <artifactId>maven-jar-plugin</artifactId>
> > <configuration>
> > <archive>
> > <manifestEntries>
> > <Specification-Title>${project.name}</Specification-Title>
> >
> > <Specification-Version>${project.version}</Specification-Version>
> > <Implementation-Title>${project.name
> }</Implementation-Title>
> > <Implementation-Version>${project.version} ${buildNumber} -
> ${
> > user.name}</Implementation-Version>
> > <SCM-Revision>${buildNumber}</SCM-Revision>
> > <SCM-url>${scm.url}</SCM-url>
> > </manifestEntries>
> > </archive>
> > </configuration>
> > </plugin>
> >
> >
> >
> > On Nov 26, 2008, at 3:24 PM, James Carman wrote:
> >
> > The revision doesn't tell you everything, though. Typically, you don't
> >> release from "trunk" (at least you're not supposed to). You create a
> tag
> >> and create the release from there. So, the tag/revision would be what
> you
> >> need to easily recreate the release.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Nov 26, 2008, at 11:38 AM, Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I think Wayne was referring not to your post, but in general - if we
> >>>
> >>>> package
> >>>> most of the projects up neatly under one parent, then other projects
> >>>> that
> >>>> aren't in the same subdirectory / build cycle may get lost.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> Hopefully having a cleaned up source tree with better pom/version reuse
> >>> will make it much easier to keep things up-to-date and useful. It
> should
> >>> not be that hard to clean up most of the existing projects.
> >>>
> >>> Another thing that would be nice to add to the parent pom is:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> http://maven.apache.org/plugin-developers/cookbook/add-svn-revision-to-manifest.html
> >>>
> >>> I have found it invaluable to have the SVN version cooked into the
> >>> artifacts -- particularly after something has been running stable for a
> >>> year
> >>> and you can't possibly remember exactly where it came from.
> >>>
> >>> ryan
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>>> Jeremy Thomerson
> >>>> http://www.wickettraining.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 7:10 AM, James Carman <
> >>>> james@carmanconsulting.com
> >>>>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Merely "bundling" the examples with the code itself shouldn't cause
> >>>> this,
> >>>>
> >>>>> do
> >>>>> you think?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:17 AM, Wayne Pope <
> >>>>> waynemailinglists@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> YES.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> However I feel people may pass over the earlier branches (especially
> >>>>>> when
> >>>>>> we're on Wicket version 5.8!) and hence miss some great code that
> may
> >>>>>> not
> >>>>>> take much to get working and maintain on the newer branch.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:06 AM, James Carman <
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> james@carmanconsulting.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> Yes, our entire project at work is like this. The top-level project
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> holds multiple modules. Each has a common, server, and client
> >>>>>>> submodule. Works like a charm.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Jeremy Thomerson
> >>>>>>> <je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Great idea! Yes. I have not nested any projects three deep in
> the
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> past,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> but it should work. Has anybody else tried this?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> It would be:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> wicket-stuff-parent
> >>>>>>>> -- wicket-foo
> >>>>>>>> -- wicket-foo-core
> >>>>>>>> -- wicket-foo-examples
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Ryan McKinley <ryantxu@gmail.com
> >
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I don't know if this has already been discussed, but another part
> of
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> cleanup that would be nice is to group the main project and the
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> example
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> project into a folder with a common parent pom.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> For example, I find the layout of:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/inmethod-grid/
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> much easier to use/maintain then the apparent standard of
> >>>>>>>>> /wicketstuff-project & /wicketstuff-project-example
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push/
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push-examples/
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> one key thing about this change is that mvn eclipse:eclipse makes
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> example project depend on the core project
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> perhaps this could be added to the 'organize' task?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> ryan
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Jeremy Thomerson
> >>>>>>>> http://www.wickettraining.com
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: [discuss] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>.
yes, that is a problem with this plugin -- it looks at the configured
pom scm and uses the info from there. The biggest problem is that if
you build a modified version, the revision number is from the repos,
*not* your code! so if 'svn info' shows Revision: 220M or 220~218,
the cooked in version would still be 220.
In ant, I had a task that calls 'svn info' and parses the result, but
this is the best off the shelf replacement i could find in maven.
ryan
On Nov 26, 2008, at 5:55 PM, James Carman wrote:
> But, here you have to assume it was released from the trunk (which I
> guess
> you can ascertain from the pom's SVN url). I'm not saying this
> information
> isn't useful. I'm just saying it doesn't give you the whole picture
> by
> itself. I was unaware of this plugin, but I do believe I'll add it
> to our
> build cycle. Thanks for the tip!
>
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 4:18 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Right, the svn url is important especially when you deploy from
>> 'non-released' versions (like most of wicketstuff)
>>
>> This is what I have in my pom.xml
>>
>>
>> <plugin>
>> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
>> <artifactId>maven-jar-plugin</artifactId>
>> <configuration>
>> <archive>
>> <manifestEntries>
>> <Specification-Title>${project.name}</Specification-
>> Title>
>>
>> <Specification-Version>${project.version}</Specification-Version>
>> <Implementation-Title>${project.name}</Implementation-
>> Title>
>> <Implementation-Version>${project.version} $
>> {buildNumber} - ${
>> user.name}</Implementation-Version>
>> <SCM-Revision>${buildNumber}</SCM-Revision>
>> <SCM-url>${scm.url}</SCM-url>
>> </manifestEntries>
>> </archive>
>> </configuration>
>> </plugin>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Nov 26, 2008, at 3:24 PM, James Carman wrote:
>>
>> The revision doesn't tell you everything, though. Typically, you
>> don't
>>> release from "trunk" (at least you're not supposed to). You
>>> create a tag
>>> and create the release from there. So, the tag/revision would be
>>> what you
>>> need to easily recreate the release.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Nov 26, 2008, at 11:38 AM, Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think Wayne was referring not to your post, but in general - if
>>>> we
>>>>
>>>>> package
>>>>> most of the projects up neatly under one parent, then other
>>>>> projects
>>>>> that
>>>>> aren't in the same subdirectory / build cycle may get lost.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Hopefully having a cleaned up source tree with better pom/version
>>>> reuse
>>>> will make it much easier to keep things up-to-date and useful.
>>>> It should
>>>> not be that hard to clean up most of the existing projects.
>>>>
>>>> Another thing that would be nice to add to the parent pom is:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://maven.apache.org/plugin-developers/cookbook/add-svn-revision-to-manifest.html
>>>>
>>>> I have found it invaluable to have the SVN version cooked into the
>>>> artifacts -- particularly after something has been running stable
>>>> for a
>>>> year
>>>> and you can't possibly remember exactly where it came from.
>>>>
>>>> ryan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>> Jeremy Thomerson
>>>>> http://www.wickettraining.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 7:10 AM, James Carman <
>>>>> james@carmanconsulting.com
>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Merely "bundling" the examples with the code itself shouldn't
>>>>> cause
>>>>> this,
>>>>>
>>>>>> do
>>>>>> you think?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:17 AM, Wayne Pope <
>>>>>> waynemailinglists@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> YES.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However I feel people may pass over the earlier branches
>>>>>>> (especially
>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>> we're on Wicket version 5.8!) and hence miss some great code
>>>>>>> that may
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>> take much to get working and maintain on the newer branch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:06 AM, James Carman <
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> james@carmanconsulting.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, our entire project at work is like this. The top-level
>>>>>>> project
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> holds multiple modules. Each has a common, server, and client
>>>>>>>> submodule. Works like a charm.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Jeremy Thomerson
>>>>>>>> <je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Great idea! Yes. I have not nested any projects three deep
>>>>>>>> in the
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> past,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> but it should work. Has anybody else tried this?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It would be:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> wicket-stuff-parent
>>>>>>>>> -- wicket-foo
>>>>>>>>> -- wicket-foo-core
>>>>>>>>> -- wicket-foo-examples
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Ryan McKinley <ryantxu@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't know if this has already been discussed, but another
>>>>>>>>> part of
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> cleanup that would be nice is to group the main project and the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> example
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> project into a folder with a common parent pom.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> For example, I find the layout of:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/inmethod-grid/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> much easier to use/maintain then the apparent standard of
>>>>>>>>>> /wicketstuff-project & /wicketstuff-project-example
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push-examples/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> one key thing about this change is that mvn eclipse:eclipse
>>>>>>> makes
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> example project depend on the core project
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> perhaps this could be added to the 'organize' task?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ryan
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Jeremy Thomerson
>>>>>>>>> http://www.wickettraining.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: [discuss] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
But, here you have to assume it was released from the trunk (which I guess
you can ascertain from the pom's SVN url). I'm not saying this information
isn't useful. I'm just saying it doesn't give you the whole picture by
itself. I was unaware of this plugin, but I do believe I'll add it to our
build cycle. Thanks for the tip!
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 4:18 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Right, the svn url is important especially when you deploy from
> 'non-released' versions (like most of wicketstuff)
>
> This is what I have in my pom.xml
>
>
> <plugin>
> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
> <artifactId>maven-jar-plugin</artifactId>
> <configuration>
> <archive>
> <manifestEntries>
> <Specification-Title>${project.name}</Specification-Title>
>
> <Specification-Version>${project.version}</Specification-Version>
> <Implementation-Title>${project.name}</Implementation-Title>
> <Implementation-Version>${project.version} ${buildNumber} - ${
> user.name}</Implementation-Version>
> <SCM-Revision>${buildNumber}</SCM-Revision>
> <SCM-url>${scm.url}</SCM-url>
> </manifestEntries>
> </archive>
> </configuration>
> </plugin>
>
>
>
> On Nov 26, 2008, at 3:24 PM, James Carman wrote:
>
> The revision doesn't tell you everything, though. Typically, you don't
>> release from "trunk" (at least you're not supposed to). You create a tag
>> and create the release from there. So, the tag/revision would be what you
>> need to easily recreate the release.
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 26, 2008, at 11:38 AM, Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
>>>
>>> I think Wayne was referring not to your post, but in general - if we
>>>
>>>> package
>>>> most of the projects up neatly under one parent, then other projects
>>>> that
>>>> aren't in the same subdirectory / build cycle may get lost.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Hopefully having a cleaned up source tree with better pom/version reuse
>>> will make it much easier to keep things up-to-date and useful. It should
>>> not be that hard to clean up most of the existing projects.
>>>
>>> Another thing that would be nice to add to the parent pom is:
>>>
>>>
>>> http://maven.apache.org/plugin-developers/cookbook/add-svn-revision-to-manifest.html
>>>
>>> I have found it invaluable to have the SVN version cooked into the
>>> artifacts -- particularly after something has been running stable for a
>>> year
>>> and you can't possibly remember exactly where it came from.
>>>
>>> ryan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>> Jeremy Thomerson
>>>> http://www.wickettraining.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 7:10 AM, James Carman <
>>>> james@carmanconsulting.com
>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Merely "bundling" the examples with the code itself shouldn't cause
>>>> this,
>>>>
>>>>> do
>>>>> you think?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:17 AM, Wayne Pope <
>>>>> waynemailinglists@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> YES.
>>>>>
>>>>>> However I feel people may pass over the earlier branches (especially
>>>>>> when
>>>>>> we're on Wicket version 5.8!) and hence miss some great code that may
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> take much to get working and maintain on the newer branch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:06 AM, James Carman <
>>>>>>
>>>>>> james@carmanconsulting.com
>>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, our entire project at work is like this. The top-level project
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> holds multiple modules. Each has a common, server, and client
>>>>>>> submodule. Works like a charm.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Jeremy Thomerson
>>>>>>> <je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Great idea! Yes. I have not nested any projects three deep in the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> past,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> but it should work. Has anybody else tried this?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It would be:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> wicket-stuff-parent
>>>>>>>> -- wicket-foo
>>>>>>>> -- wicket-foo-core
>>>>>>>> -- wicket-foo-examples
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't know if this has already been discussed, but another part of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> cleanup that would be nice is to group the main project and the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> example
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> project into a folder with a common parent pom.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For example, I find the layout of:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/inmethod-grid/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> much easier to use/maintain then the apparent standard of
>>>>>>>>> /wicketstuff-project & /wicketstuff-project-example
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push-examples/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> one key thing about this change is that mvn eclipse:eclipse makes
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>> example project depend on the core project
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> perhaps this could be added to the 'organize' task?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ryan
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Jeremy Thomerson
>>>>>>>> http://www.wickettraining.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
Re: [discuss] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>.
Right, the svn url is important especially when you deploy from 'non-
released' versions (like most of wicketstuff)
This is what I have in my pom.xml
<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-jar-plugin</artifactId>
<configuration>
<archive>
<manifestEntries>
<Specification-Title>${project.name}</Specification-
Title>
<Specification-Version>${project.version}</
Specification-Version>
<Implementation-Title>${project.name}</Implementation-
Title>
<Implementation-Version>${project.version} $
{buildNumber} - ${user.name}</Implementation-Version>
<SCM-Revision>${buildNumber}</SCM-Revision>
<SCM-url>${scm.url}</SCM-url>
</manifestEntries>
</archive>
</configuration>
</plugin>
On Nov 26, 2008, at 3:24 PM, James Carman wrote:
> The revision doesn't tell you everything, though. Typically, you
> don't
> release from "trunk" (at least you're not supposed to). You create
> a tag
> and create the release from there. So, the tag/revision would be
> what you
> need to easily recreate the release.
>
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Nov 26, 2008, at 11:38 AM, Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
>>
>> I think Wayne was referring not to your post, but in general - if we
>>> package
>>> most of the projects up neatly under one parent, then other
>>> projects that
>>> aren't in the same subdirectory / build cycle may get lost.
>>>
>>
>> Hopefully having a cleaned up source tree with better pom/version
>> reuse
>> will make it much easier to keep things up-to-date and useful. It
>> should
>> not be that hard to clean up most of the existing projects.
>>
>> Another thing that would be nice to add to the parent pom is:
>>
>> http://maven.apache.org/plugin-developers/cookbook/add-svn-revision-to-manifest.html
>>
>> I have found it invaluable to have the SVN version cooked into the
>> artifacts -- particularly after something has been running stable
>> for a year
>> and you can't possibly remember exactly where it came from.
>>
>> ryan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> --
>>> Jeremy Thomerson
>>> http://www.wickettraining.com
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 7:10 AM, James Carman <james@carmanconsulting.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Merely "bundling" the examples with the code itself shouldn't
>>> cause this,
>>>> do
>>>> you think?
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:17 AM, Wayne Pope <
>>>> waynemailinglists@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> YES.
>>>>> However I feel people may pass over the earlier branches
>>>>> (especially
>>>>> when
>>>>> we're on Wicket version 5.8!) and hence miss some great code
>>>>> that may
>>>>> not
>>>>> take much to get working and maintain on the newer branch.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:06 AM, James Carman <
>>>>>
>>>> james@carmanconsulting.com
>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, our entire project at work is like this. The top-level
>>>>> project
>>>>>> holds multiple modules. Each has a common, server, and client
>>>>>> submodule. Works like a charm.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Jeremy Thomerson
>>>>>> <je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Great idea! Yes. I have not nested any projects three deep
>>>>>>> in the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> past,
>>>>>
>>>>>> but it should work. Has anybody else tried this?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It would be:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wicket-stuff-parent
>>>>>>> -- wicket-foo
>>>>>>> -- wicket-foo-core
>>>>>>> -- wicket-foo-examples
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Ryan McKinley <ryantxu@gmail.com
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't know if this has already been discussed, but another
>>>>>>> part of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>
>>>>>> cleanup that would be nice is to group the main project and the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> example
>>>>>
>>>>>> project into a folder with a common parent pom.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For example, I find the layout of:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/inmethod-grid/
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> much easier to use/maintain then the apparent standard of
>>>>>>>> /wicketstuff-project & /wicketstuff-project-example
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push/
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push-examples/
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> one key thing about this change is that mvn eclipse:eclipse
>>>>>>>> makes
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>> example project depend on the core project
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> perhaps this could be added to the 'organize' task?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ryan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Jeremy Thomerson
>>>>>>> http://www.wickettraining.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: [discuss] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
The revision doesn't tell you everything, though. Typically, you don't
release from "trunk" (at least you're not supposed to). You create a tag
and create the release from there. So, the tag/revision would be what you
need to easily recreate the release.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Nov 26, 2008, at 11:38 AM, Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
>
> I think Wayne was referring not to your post, but in general - if we
>> package
>> most of the projects up neatly under one parent, then other projects that
>> aren't in the same subdirectory / build cycle may get lost.
>>
>
> Hopefully having a cleaned up source tree with better pom/version reuse
> will make it much easier to keep things up-to-date and useful. It should
> not be that hard to clean up most of the existing projects.
>
> Another thing that would be nice to add to the parent pom is:
>
> http://maven.apache.org/plugin-developers/cookbook/add-svn-revision-to-manifest.html
>
> I have found it invaluable to have the SVN version cooked into the
> artifacts -- particularly after something has been running stable for a year
> and you can't possibly remember exactly where it came from.
>
> ryan
>
>
>
>
>> --
>> Jeremy Thomerson
>> http://www.wickettraining.com
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 7:10 AM, James Carman <james@carmanconsulting.com
>> >wrote:
>>
>> Merely "bundling" the examples with the code itself shouldn't cause this,
>>> do
>>> you think?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:17 AM, Wayne Pope <
>>> waynemailinglists@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> YES.
>>>> However I feel people may pass over the earlier branches (especially
>>>> when
>>>> we're on Wicket version 5.8!) and hence miss some great code that may
>>>> not
>>>> take much to get working and maintain on the newer branch.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:06 AM, James Carman <
>>>>
>>> james@carmanconsulting.com
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, our entire project at work is like this. The top-level project
>>>>> holds multiple modules. Each has a common, server, and client
>>>>> submodule. Works like a charm.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Jeremy Thomerson
>>>>> <je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Great idea! Yes. I have not nested any projects three deep in the
>>>>>>
>>>>> past,
>>>>
>>>>> but it should work. Has anybody else tried this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would be:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> wicket-stuff-parent
>>>>>> -- wicket-foo
>>>>>> -- wicket-foo-core
>>>>>> -- wicket-foo-examples
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't know if this has already been discussed, but another part of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>> cleanup that would be nice is to group the main project and the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> example
>>>>
>>>>> project into a folder with a common parent pom.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For example, I find the layout of:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/inmethod-grid/
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> much easier to use/maintain then the apparent standard of
>>>>>>> /wicketstuff-project & /wicketstuff-project-example
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push/
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push-examples/
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> one key thing about this change is that mvn eclipse:eclipse makes
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> the
>>>
>>>> example project depend on the core project
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> perhaps this could be added to the 'organize' task?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ryan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Jeremy Thomerson
>>>>>> http://www.wickettraining.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
Re: [discuss] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com>.
Good suggestion - I like that, too. I'll plan on adding it to the parent
POM.
Thanks!
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 1:13 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Nov 26, 2008, at 11:38 AM, Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
>
> I think Wayne was referring not to your post, but in general - if we
>> package
>> most of the projects up neatly under one parent, then other projects that
>> aren't in the same subdirectory / build cycle may get lost.
>>
>
> Hopefully having a cleaned up source tree with better pom/version reuse
> will make it much easier to keep things up-to-date and useful. It should
> not be that hard to clean up most of the existing projects.
>
> Another thing that would be nice to add to the parent pom is:
>
> http://maven.apache.org/plugin-developers/cookbook/add-svn-revision-to-manifest.html
>
> I have found it invaluable to have the SVN version cooked into the
> artifacts -- particularly after something has been running stable for a year
> and you can't possibly remember exactly where it came from.
>
> ryan
>
>
>
>
>> --
>> Jeremy Thomerson
>> http://www.wickettraining.com
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 7:10 AM, James Carman <james@carmanconsulting.com
>> >wrote:
>>
>> Merely "bundling" the examples with the code itself shouldn't cause this,
>>> do
>>> you think?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:17 AM, Wayne Pope <
>>> waynemailinglists@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> YES.
>>>> However I feel people may pass over the earlier branches (especially
>>>> when
>>>> we're on Wicket version 5.8!) and hence miss some great code that may
>>>> not
>>>> take much to get working and maintain on the newer branch.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:06 AM, James Carman <
>>>>
>>> james@carmanconsulting.com
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, our entire project at work is like this. The top-level project
>>>>> holds multiple modules. Each has a common, server, and client
>>>>> submodule. Works like a charm.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Jeremy Thomerson
>>>>> <je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Great idea! Yes. I have not nested any projects three deep in the
>>>>>>
>>>>> past,
>>>>
>>>>> but it should work. Has anybody else tried this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would be:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> wicket-stuff-parent
>>>>>> -- wicket-foo
>>>>>> -- wicket-foo-core
>>>>>> -- wicket-foo-examples
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't know if this has already been discussed, but another part of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>> cleanup that would be nice is to group the main project and the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> example
>>>>
>>>>> project into a folder with a common parent pom.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For example, I find the layout of:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/inmethod-grid/
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> much easier to use/maintain then the apparent standard of
>>>>>>> /wicketstuff-project & /wicketstuff-project-example
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push/
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push-examples/
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> one key thing about this change is that mvn eclipse:eclipse makes
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> the
>>>
>>>> example project depend on the core project
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> perhaps this could be added to the 'organize' task?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ryan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Jeremy Thomerson
>>>>>> http://www.wickettraining.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com
Re: [discuss] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>.
On Nov 26, 2008, at 11:38 AM, Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
> I think Wayne was referring not to your post, but in general - if we
> package
> most of the projects up neatly under one parent, then other projects
> that
> aren't in the same subdirectory / build cycle may get lost.
Hopefully having a cleaned up source tree with better pom/version
reuse will make it much easier to keep things up-to-date and useful.
It should not be that hard to clean up most of the existing projects.
Another thing that would be nice to add to the parent pom is:
http://maven.apache.org/plugin-developers/cookbook/add-svn-revision-to-manifest.html
I have found it invaluable to have the SVN version cooked into the
artifacts -- particularly after something has been running stable for
a year and you can't possibly remember exactly where it came from.
ryan
>
> --
> Jeremy Thomerson
> http://www.wickettraining.com
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 7:10 AM, James Carman <james@carmanconsulting.com
> >wrote:
>
>> Merely "bundling" the examples with the code itself shouldn't cause
>> this,
>> do
>> you think?
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:17 AM, Wayne Pope <
>> waynemailinglists@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> YES.
>>> However I feel people may pass over the earlier branches
>>> (especially when
>>> we're on Wicket version 5.8!) and hence miss some great code that
>>> may not
>>> take much to get working and maintain on the newer branch.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:06 AM, James Carman <
>> james@carmanconsulting.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes, our entire project at work is like this. The top-level
>>>> project
>>>> holds multiple modules. Each has a common, server, and client
>>>> submodule. Works like a charm.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Jeremy Thomerson
>>>> <je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
>>>>> Great idea! Yes. I have not nested any projects three deep in
>>>>> the
>>> past,
>>>>> but it should work. Has anybody else tried this?
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be:
>>>>>
>>>>> wicket-stuff-parent
>>>>> -- wicket-foo
>>>>> -- wicket-foo-core
>>>>> -- wicket-foo-examples
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't know if this has already been discussed, but another
>>>>>> part of
>>> the
>>>>>> cleanup that would be nice is to group the main project and the
>>> example
>>>>>> project into a folder with a common parent pom.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For example, I find the layout of:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/inmethod-grid/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> much easier to use/maintain then the apparent standard of
>>>>>> /wicketstuff-project & /wicketstuff-project-example
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push-examples/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> one key thing about this change is that mvn eclipse:eclipse makes
>> the
>>>>>> example project depend on the core project
>>>>>>
>>>>>> perhaps this could be added to the 'organize' task?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ryan
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jeremy Thomerson
>>>>> http://www.wickettraining.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: [discuss] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Jeremy Thomerson <
jeremy@wickettraining.com> wrote:
> I think Wayne was referring not to your post, but in general - if we
> package
> most of the projects up neatly under one parent, then other projects that
> aren't in the same subdirectory / build cycle may get lost.
>
> I don't see this as too much of an issue - a project's visibility will come
> from a) it's documentation on wicketstuff.org or b) it's userbase talking
> about it on the user list. Typically, browsing the SVN tree isn't the way
> we find projects.
Agreed! Now, the only issue is beefing up the documentation on
wicketstuff.org. I've found that it's very difficult to find what I'm
looking for up there.
Re: [discuss] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 5:38 PM, Jeremy Thomerson
<je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
> Typically, browsing the SVN tree isn't the way we find projects.
Talk for yourself :)
Martijn
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: [discuss] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com>.
I think Wayne was referring not to your post, but in general - if we package
most of the projects up neatly under one parent, then other projects that
aren't in the same subdirectory / build cycle may get lost.
I don't see this as too much of an issue - a project's visibility will come
from a) it's documentation on wicketstuff.org or b) it's userbase talking
about it on the user list. Typically, browsing the SVN tree isn't the way
we find projects.
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 7:10 AM, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>wrote:
> Merely "bundling" the examples with the code itself shouldn't cause this,
> do
> you think?
>
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:17 AM, Wayne Pope <
> waynemailinglists@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > YES.
> > However I feel people may pass over the earlier branches (especially when
> > we're on Wicket version 5.8!) and hence miss some great code that may not
> > take much to get working and maintain on the newer branch.
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:06 AM, James Carman <
> james@carmanconsulting.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, our entire project at work is like this. The top-level project
> > > holds multiple modules. Each has a common, server, and client
> > > submodule. Works like a charm.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Jeremy Thomerson
> > > <je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
> > > > Great idea! Yes. I have not nested any projects three deep in the
> > past,
> > > > but it should work. Has anybody else tried this?
> > > >
> > > > It would be:
> > > >
> > > > wicket-stuff-parent
> > > > -- wicket-foo
> > > > -- wicket-foo-core
> > > > -- wicket-foo-examples
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I don't know if this has already been discussed, but another part of
> > the
> > > >> cleanup that would be nice is to group the main project and the
> > example
> > > >> project into a folder with a common parent pom.
> > > >>
> > > >> For example, I find the layout of:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/inmethod-grid/
> > > >>
> > > >> much easier to use/maintain then the apparent standard of
> > > >> /wicketstuff-project & /wicketstuff-project-example
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push/
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push-examples/
> > > >>
> > > >> one key thing about this change is that mvn eclipse:eclipse makes
> the
> > > >> example project depend on the core project
> > > >>
> > > >> perhaps this could be added to the 'organize' task?
> > > >>
> > > >> ryan
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jeremy Thomerson
> > > > http://www.wickettraining.com
> > > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [discuss] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
Merely "bundling" the examples with the code itself shouldn't cause this, do
you think?
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:17 AM, Wayne Pope <
waynemailinglists@googlemail.com> wrote:
> YES.
> However I feel people may pass over the earlier branches (especially when
> we're on Wicket version 5.8!) and hence miss some great code that may not
> take much to get working and maintain on the newer branch.
>
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:06 AM, James Carman <james@carmanconsulting.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Yes, our entire project at work is like this. The top-level project
> > holds multiple modules. Each has a common, server, and client
> > submodule. Works like a charm.
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Jeremy Thomerson
> > <je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
> > > Great idea! Yes. I have not nested any projects three deep in the
> past,
> > > but it should work. Has anybody else tried this?
> > >
> > > It would be:
> > >
> > > wicket-stuff-parent
> > > -- wicket-foo
> > > -- wicket-foo-core
> > > -- wicket-foo-examples
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I don't know if this has already been discussed, but another part of
> the
> > >> cleanup that would be nice is to group the main project and the
> example
> > >> project into a folder with a common parent pom.
> > >>
> > >> For example, I find the layout of:
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/inmethod-grid/
> > >>
> > >> much easier to use/maintain then the apparent standard of
> > >> /wicketstuff-project & /wicketstuff-project-example
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push/
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push-examples/
> > >>
> > >> one key thing about this change is that mvn eclipse:eclipse makes the
> > >> example project depend on the core project
> > >>
> > >> perhaps this could be added to the 'organize' task?
> > >>
> > >> ryan
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jeremy Thomerson
> > > http://www.wickettraining.com
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: [discuss] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Wayne Pope <wa...@googlemail.com>.
YES.
However I feel people may pass over the earlier branches (especially when
we're on Wicket version 5.8!) and hence miss some great code that may not
take much to get working and maintain on the newer branch.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:06 AM, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>wrote:
> Yes, our entire project at work is like this. The top-level project
> holds multiple modules. Each has a common, server, and client
> submodule. Works like a charm.
>
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Jeremy Thomerson
> <je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
> > Great idea! Yes. I have not nested any projects three deep in the past,
> > but it should work. Has anybody else tried this?
> >
> > It would be:
> >
> > wicket-stuff-parent
> > -- wicket-foo
> > -- wicket-foo-core
> > -- wicket-foo-examples
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I don't know if this has already been discussed, but another part of the
> >> cleanup that would be nice is to group the main project and the example
> >> project into a folder with a common parent pom.
> >>
> >> For example, I find the layout of:
> >>
> >>
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/inmethod-grid/
> >>
> >> much easier to use/maintain then the apparent standard of
> >> /wicketstuff-project & /wicketstuff-project-example
> >>
> >>
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push/
> >>
> >>
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push-examples/
> >>
> >> one key thing about this change is that mvn eclipse:eclipse makes the
> >> example project depend on the core project
> >>
> >> perhaps this could be added to the 'organize' task?
> >>
> >> ryan
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jeremy Thomerson
> > http://www.wickettraining.com
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
Re: [discuss] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
Yes, our entire project at work is like this. The top-level project
holds multiple modules. Each has a common, server, and client
submodule. Works like a charm.
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Jeremy Thomerson
<je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
> Great idea! Yes. I have not nested any projects three deep in the past,
> but it should work. Has anybody else tried this?
>
> It would be:
>
> wicket-stuff-parent
> -- wicket-foo
> -- wicket-foo-core
> -- wicket-foo-examples
>
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I don't know if this has already been discussed, but another part of the
>> cleanup that would be nice is to group the main project and the example
>> project into a folder with a common parent pom.
>>
>> For example, I find the layout of:
>>
>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/inmethod-grid/
>>
>> much easier to use/maintain then the apparent standard of
>> /wicketstuff-project & /wicketstuff-project-example
>>
>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push/
>>
>> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push-examples/
>>
>> one key thing about this change is that mvn eclipse:eclipse makes the
>> example project depend on the core project
>>
>> perhaps this could be added to the 'organize' task?
>>
>> ryan
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Jeremy Thomerson
> http://www.wickettraining.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: [discuss] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com>.
Great idea! Yes. I have not nested any projects three deep in the past,
but it should work. Has anybody else tried this?
It would be:
wicket-stuff-parent
-- wicket-foo
-- wicket-foo-core
-- wicket-foo-examples
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't know if this has already been discussed, but another part of the
> cleanup that would be nice is to group the main project and the example
> project into a folder with a common parent pom.
>
> For example, I find the layout of:
>
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/inmethod-grid/
>
> much easier to use/maintain then the apparent standard of
> /wicketstuff-project & /wicketstuff-project-example
>
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push/
>
> https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push-examples/
>
> one key thing about this change is that mvn eclipse:eclipse makes the
> example project depend on the core project
>
> perhaps this could be added to the 'organize' task?
>
> ryan
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com
[discuss] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>.
I don't know if this has already been discussed, but another part of
the cleanup that would be nice is to group the main project and the
example project into a folder with a common parent pom.
For example, I find the layout of:
https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/inmethod-grid/
much easier to use/maintain then the apparent standard of /wicketstuff-
project & /wicketstuff-project-example
https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push/
https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-push-examples/
one key thing about this change is that mvn eclipse:eclipse makes the
example project depend on the core project
perhaps this could be added to the 'organize' task?
ryan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Per Ejeklint <ej...@mac.com>.
[X] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff projects
structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is produced for each
Wicket release.
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--Organizing-Wicket-Stuff---Regular-Release-Schedule--tp20666510p20676088.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Dipu <di...@googlemail.com>.
[X] - YES
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 6:13 PM, Jeremy Thomerson <jeremy@wickettraining.com
> wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> I would like to get your opinion on an idea regarding the Wicket Stuff
> project(s). As you are familiar with, Wicket Stuff is where anyone can
> create anything related to Wicket, small or large. One problem that new
> users of Wicket (and us "old" users) come across is that there is a lot of
> stuff in there, and not all of it is well maintained, and there aren't
> specific releases of many of the projects. So, you have to build it
> yourself and figure out which version matches which Wicket version, etc...
>
> What I would like to know is if everyone thinks it would be good to have a
> subset of WS projects that are structured in a way that they are always in
> sync with the Wicket versions. IOW, there would be two branches - 1.3.X
> and
> 1.4 (trunk), just like Wicket has. There would be a parent module and all
> of the modules that wanted to participate would be structured under it.
> They would all release in sync with Wicket. For instance, when Wicket
> releases 1.4-RC2, we would cut a release of this wicket-stuff-structured
> (bad name) and all of the projects under it at 1.4-RC2. I haven't yet
> figured out how interim releases would work (new features are added to a WS
> project and it wants to cut a release between wicket releases) or if that
> matters.
>
> This would not have to effect all WS projects - someone could continue to
> add projects to WS just like they do today. This would simply create a
> sub-tree of projects that are in the structured / scheduled release area.
> For those that don't want to be part of that structure, they could continue
> operating as they do today.
>
> So, here's the vote:
>
> [ ] - NO! We should leave Wicket Stuff like it is - a free-for-all with no
> structure
> [ ] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff
> projects
> structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is produced for each
> Wicket release.
> [ ] - Maybe - I have a better idea (perfect!)
>
> Also - please add the following:
> 1 - Would you be interested in helping to maintain such a thing. (If we had
> two or three of the owners of the larger projects on board, I don't think
> it
> would be too hard to keep the codebase of this in sync with Wicket core.)
> 2 - What projects do you own (and by your vote we'll see if you want those
> projects to be included in this restructuring).
>
> --
> Jeremy Thomerson
> http://www.wickettraining.com
>
Re: [VOTE] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
[X] YES
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 1:13 PM, Jeremy Thomerson
<je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> I would like to get your opinion on an idea regarding the Wicket Stuff
> project(s). As you are familiar with, Wicket Stuff is where anyone can
> create anything related to Wicket, small or large. One problem that new
> users of Wicket (and us "old" users) come across is that there is a lot of
> stuff in there, and not all of it is well maintained, and there aren't
> specific releases of many of the projects. So, you have to build it
> yourself and figure out which version matches which Wicket version, etc...
>
> What I would like to know is if everyone thinks it would be good to have a
> subset of WS projects that are structured in a way that they are always in
> sync with the Wicket versions. IOW, there would be two branches - 1.3.X and
> 1.4 (trunk), just like Wicket has. There would be a parent module and all
> of the modules that wanted to participate would be structured under it.
> They would all release in sync with Wicket. For instance, when Wicket
> releases 1.4-RC2, we would cut a release of this wicket-stuff-structured
> (bad name) and all of the projects under it at 1.4-RC2. I haven't yet
> figured out how interim releases would work (new features are added to a WS
> project and it wants to cut a release between wicket releases) or if that
> matters.
>
> This would not have to effect all WS projects - someone could continue to
> add projects to WS just like they do today. This would simply create a
> sub-tree of projects that are in the structured / scheduled release area.
> For those that don't want to be part of that structure, they could continue
> operating as they do today.
>
> So, here's the vote:
>
> [ ] - NO! We should leave Wicket Stuff like it is - a free-for-all with no
> structure
> [ ] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff projects
> structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is produced for each
> Wicket release.
> [ ] - Maybe - I have a better idea (perfect!)
>
> Also - please add the following:
> 1 - Would you be interested in helping to maintain such a thing. (If we had
> two or three of the owners of the larger projects on board, I don't think it
> would be too hard to keep the codebase of this in sync with Wicket core.)
> 2 - What projects do you own (and by your vote we'll see if you want those
> projects to be included in this restructuring).
>
> --
> Jeremy Thomerson
> http://www.wickettraining.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Francisco Diaz Trepat - gmail <fr...@gmail.com>.
[X] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff projects
structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is produced for each
Wicket release.
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Jeremy Thomerson <jeremy@wickettraining.com
> wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> I would like to get your opinion on an idea regarding the Wicket Stuff
> project(s). As you are familiar with, Wicket Stuff is where anyone can
> create anything related to Wicket, small or large. One problem that new
> users of Wicket (and us "old" users) come across is that there is a lot of
> stuff in there, and not all of it is well maintained, and there aren't
> specific releases of many of the projects. So, you have to build it
> yourself and figure out which version matches which Wicket version, etc...
>
> What I would like to know is if everyone thinks it would be good to have a
> subset of WS projects that are structured in a way that they are always in
> sync with the Wicket versions. IOW, there would be two branches - 1.3.X
> and
> 1.4 (trunk), just like Wicket has. There would be a parent module and all
> of the modules that wanted to participate would be structured under it.
> They would all release in sync with Wicket. For instance, when Wicket
> releases 1.4-RC2, we would cut a release of this wicket-stuff-structured
> (bad name) and all of the projects under it at 1.4-RC2. I haven't yet
> figured out how interim releases would work (new features are added to a WS
> project and it wants to cut a release between wicket releases) or if that
> matters.
>
> This would not have to effect all WS projects - someone could continue to
> add projects to WS just like they do today. This would simply create a
> sub-tree of projects that are in the structured / scheduled release area.
> For those that don't want to be part of that structure, they could continue
> operating as they do today.
>
> So, here's the vote:
>
> [ ] - NO! We should leave Wicket Stuff like it is - a free-for-all with no
> structure
> [ ] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff
> projects
> structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is produced for each
> Wicket release.
> [ ] - Maybe - I have a better idea (perfect!)
>
> Also - please add the following:
> 1 - Would you be interested in helping to maintain such a thing. (If we had
> two or three of the owners of the larger projects on board, I don't think
> it
> would be too hard to keep the codebase of this in sync with Wicket core.)
> 2 - What projects do you own (and by your vote we'll see if you want those
> projects to be included in this restructuring).
>
> --
> Jeremy Thomerson
> http://www.wickettraining.com
>
Re: [VOTE] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Advanced Technology® <th...@gmail.com>.
X ] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff
projects
AT(R)
RE: [VOTE] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by "Hoover, William " <wh...@nemours.org>.
[X] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff
projects structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is
produced for each Wicket release.
This should be a no-brainer ;o)
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeremy Thomerson [mailto:jeremy@wickettraining.com]
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 1:13 PM
To: users@wicket.apache.org; Wicket Development
Subject: [VOTE] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Hello everyone,
I would like to get your opinion on an idea regarding the Wicket Stuff
project(s). As you are familiar with, Wicket Stuff is where anyone can
create anything related to Wicket, small or large. One problem that new
users of Wicket (and us "old" users) come across is that there is a lot
of stuff in there, and not all of it is well maintained, and there
aren't specific releases of many of the projects. So, you have to build
it yourself and figure out which version matches which Wicket version,
etc...
What I would like to know is if everyone thinks it would be good to
have a subset of WS projects that are structured in a way that they are
always in sync with the Wicket versions. IOW, there would be two
branches - 1.3.X and
1.4 (trunk), just like Wicket has. There would be a parent module and
all of the modules that wanted to participate would be structured under
it.
They would all release in sync with Wicket. For instance, when Wicket
releases 1.4-RC2, we would cut a release of this wicket-stuff-structured
(bad name) and all of the projects under it at 1.4-RC2. I haven't yet
figured out how interim releases would work (new features are added to a
WS project and it wants to cut a release between wicket releases) or if
that matters.
This would not have to effect all WS projects - someone could continue
to add projects to WS just like they do today. This would simply create
a sub-tree of projects that are in the structured / scheduled release
area.
For those that don't want to be part of that structure, they could
continue operating as they do today.
So, here's the vote:
[ ] - NO! We should leave Wicket Stuff like it is - a free-for-all with
no structure [ ] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used
Wicket Stuff projects structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a
release is produced for each Wicket release.
[ ] - Maybe - I have a better idea (perfect!)
Also - please add the following:
1 - Would you be interested in helping to maintain such a thing. (If we
had two or three of the owners of the larger projects on board, I don't
think it would be too hard to keep the codebase of this in sync with
Wicket core.)
2 - What projects do you own (and by your vote we'll see if you want
those projects to be included in this restructuring).
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael <ni...@jayway.dk>.
Argh that should have been = "igor did a release prior to the 1.4
initial release, called 1.3 or something.."
Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael wrote:
> [ X ] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff
> projects
> structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is produced for each
>
> But I also believe this is how it are today sort of anyway not so
> strict, but cool with me.. Igor did a branch when the initial release
> of 1-4 were created...
>
> Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>> I would like to get your opinion on an idea regarding the Wicket Stuff
>> project(s). As you are familiar with, Wicket Stuff is where anyone can
>> create anything related to Wicket, small or large. One problem that new
>> users of Wicket (and us "old" users) come across is that there is a
>> lot of
>> stuff in there, and not all of it is well maintained, and there aren't
>> specific releases of many of the projects. So, you have to build it
>> yourself and figure out which version matches which Wicket version,
>> etc...
>>
>> What I would like to know is if everyone thinks it would be good to
>> have a
>> subset of WS projects that are structured in a way that they are
>> always in
>> sync with the Wicket versions. IOW, there would be two branches -
>> 1.3.X and
>> 1.4 (trunk), just like Wicket has. There would be a parent module
>> and all
>> of the modules that wanted to participate would be structured under it.
>> They would all release in sync with Wicket. For instance, when Wicket
>> releases 1.4-RC2, we would cut a release of this wicket-stuff-structured
>> (bad name) and all of the projects under it at 1.4-RC2. I haven't yet
>> figured out how interim releases would work (new features are added
>> to a WS
>> project and it wants to cut a release between wicket releases) or if
>> that
>> matters.
>>
>> This would not have to effect all WS projects - someone could
>> continue to
>> add projects to WS just like they do today. This would simply create a
>> sub-tree of projects that are in the structured / scheduled release
>> area.
>> For those that don't want to be part of that structure, they could
>> continue
>> operating as they do today.
>>
>> So, here's the vote:
>>
>> [ ] - NO! We should leave Wicket Stuff like it is - a free-for-all
>> with no
>> structure
>> [ ] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff
>> projects
>> structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is produced for
>> each
>> Wicket release.
>> [ ] - Maybe - I have a better idea (perfect!)
>>
>> Also - please add the following:
>> 1 - Would you be interested in helping to maintain such a thing. (If
>> we had
>> two or three of the owners of the larger projects on board, I don't
>> think it
>> would be too hard to keep the codebase of this in sync with Wicket
>> core.)
>> 2 - What projects do you own (and by your vote we'll see if you want
>> those
>> projects to be included in this restructuring).
>>
>>
>
--
-Wicket for love
Nino Martinez Wael
Java Specialist @ Jayway DK
http://www.jayway.dk
+45 2936 7684
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael <ni...@jayway.dk>.
[ X ] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff projects
structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is produced for each
But I also believe this is how it are today sort of anyway not so
strict, but cool with me.. Igor did a branch when the initial release of
1-4 were created...
Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> I would like to get your opinion on an idea regarding the Wicket Stuff
> project(s). As you are familiar with, Wicket Stuff is where anyone can
> create anything related to Wicket, small or large. One problem that new
> users of Wicket (and us "old" users) come across is that there is a lot of
> stuff in there, and not all of it is well maintained, and there aren't
> specific releases of many of the projects. So, you have to build it
> yourself and figure out which version matches which Wicket version, etc...
>
> What I would like to know is if everyone thinks it would be good to have a
> subset of WS projects that are structured in a way that they are always in
> sync with the Wicket versions. IOW, there would be two branches - 1.3.X and
> 1.4 (trunk), just like Wicket has. There would be a parent module and all
> of the modules that wanted to participate would be structured under it.
> They would all release in sync with Wicket. For instance, when Wicket
> releases 1.4-RC2, we would cut a release of this wicket-stuff-structured
> (bad name) and all of the projects under it at 1.4-RC2. I haven't yet
> figured out how interim releases would work (new features are added to a WS
> project and it wants to cut a release between wicket releases) or if that
> matters.
>
> This would not have to effect all WS projects - someone could continue to
> add projects to WS just like they do today. This would simply create a
> sub-tree of projects that are in the structured / scheduled release area.
> For those that don't want to be part of that structure, they could continue
> operating as they do today.
>
> So, here's the vote:
>
> [ ] - NO! We should leave Wicket Stuff like it is - a free-for-all with no
> structure
> [ ] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff projects
> structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is produced for each
> Wicket release.
> [ ] - Maybe - I have a better idea (perfect!)
>
> Also - please add the following:
> 1 - Would you be interested in helping to maintain such a thing. (If we had
> two or three of the owners of the larger projects on board, I don't think it
> would be too hard to keep the codebase of this in sync with Wicket core.)
> 2 - What projects do you own (and by your vote we'll see if you want those
> projects to be included in this restructuring).
>
>
--
-Wicket for love
Nino Martinez Wael
Java Specialist @ Jayway DK
http://www.jayway.dk
+45 2936 7684
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael <ni...@jayway.dk>.
[ X ] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff projects
structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is produced for each
But I also believe this is how it are today sort of anyway not so
strict, but cool with me.. Igor did a branch when the initial release of
1-4 were created...
Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> I would like to get your opinion on an idea regarding the Wicket Stuff
> project(s). As you are familiar with, Wicket Stuff is where anyone can
> create anything related to Wicket, small or large. One problem that new
> users of Wicket (and us "old" users) come across is that there is a lot of
> stuff in there, and not all of it is well maintained, and there aren't
> specific releases of many of the projects. So, you have to build it
> yourself and figure out which version matches which Wicket version, etc...
>
> What I would like to know is if everyone thinks it would be good to have a
> subset of WS projects that are structured in a way that they are always in
> sync with the Wicket versions. IOW, there would be two branches - 1.3.X and
> 1.4 (trunk), just like Wicket has. There would be a parent module and all
> of the modules that wanted to participate would be structured under it.
> They would all release in sync with Wicket. For instance, when Wicket
> releases 1.4-RC2, we would cut a release of this wicket-stuff-structured
> (bad name) and all of the projects under it at 1.4-RC2. I haven't yet
> figured out how interim releases would work (new features are added to a WS
> project and it wants to cut a release between wicket releases) or if that
> matters.
>
> This would not have to effect all WS projects - someone could continue to
> add projects to WS just like they do today. This would simply create a
> sub-tree of projects that are in the structured / scheduled release area.
> For those that don't want to be part of that structure, they could continue
> operating as they do today.
>
> So, here's the vote:
>
> [ ] - NO! We should leave Wicket Stuff like it is - a free-for-all with no
> structure
> [ ] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff projects
> structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is produced for each
> Wicket release.
> [ ] - Maybe - I have a better idea (perfect!)
>
> Also - please add the following:
> 1 - Would you be interested in helping to maintain such a thing. (If we had
> two or three of the owners of the larger projects on board, I don't think it
> would be too hard to keep the codebase of this in sync with Wicket core.)
> 2 - What projects do you own (and by your vote we'll see if you want those
> projects to be included in this restructuring).
>
>
--
-Wicket for love
Nino Martinez Wael
Java Specialist @ Jayway DK
http://www.jayway.dk
+45 2936 7684
Re: [VOTE] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Swanthe Lindgren <sw...@megasol.se>.
> [X] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff projects
> structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is produced for each
> Wicket release.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>.
>
> [X ] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff
> projects
> structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is produced for
> each
> Wicket release.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Stefan Simik <st...@gmail.com>.
[X] YES - very good and useful idea !
Jeremy Thomerson-5 wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
> I would like to get your opinion on an idea regarding the Wicket Stuff
> project(s). As you are familiar with, Wicket Stuff is where anyone can
> create anything related to Wicket, small or large. One problem that new
> users of Wicket (and us "old" users) come across is that there is a lot of
> stuff in there, and not all of it is well maintained, and there aren't
> specific releases of many of the projects. So, you have to build it
> yourself and figure out which version matches which Wicket version, etc...
>
> What I would like to know is if everyone thinks it would be good to have
> a
> subset of WS projects that are structured in a way that they are always in
> sync with the Wicket versions. IOW, there would be two branches - 1.3.X
> and
> 1.4 (trunk), just like Wicket has. There would be a parent module and all
> of the modules that wanted to participate would be structured under it.
> They would all release in sync with Wicket. For instance, when Wicket
> releases 1.4-RC2, we would cut a release of this wicket-stuff-structured
> (bad name) and all of the projects under it at 1.4-RC2. I haven't yet
> figured out how interim releases would work (new features are added to a
> WS
> project and it wants to cut a release between wicket releases) or if that
> matters.
>
> This would not have to effect all WS projects - someone could continue
> to
> add projects to WS just like they do today. This would simply create a
> sub-tree of projects that are in the structured / scheduled release area.
> For those that don't want to be part of that structure, they could
> continue
> operating as they do today.
>
> So, here's the vote:
>
> [ ] - NO! We should leave Wicket Stuff like it is - a free-for-all with
> no
> structure
> [ ] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff
> projects
> structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is produced for each
> Wicket release.
> [ ] - Maybe - I have a better idea (perfect!)
>
> Also - please add the following:
> 1 - Would you be interested in helping to maintain such a thing. (If we
> had
> two or three of the owners of the larger projects on board, I don't think
> it
> would be too hard to keep the codebase of this in sync with Wicket core.)
> 2 - What projects do you own (and by your vote we'll see if you want those
> projects to be included in this restructuring).
>
> --
> Jeremy Thomerson
> http://www.wickettraining.com
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--Organizing-Wicket-Stuff---Regular-Release-Schedule--tp20666510p20685668.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Antony Stubbs <an...@gmail.com>.
> [X] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff
> projects
> structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is produced for
> each
> Wicket release.
Sounds like a good idea, if you can get enough WS projects to actively
participate. My concern would be waning interest.
On 24/11/2008, at 7:13 PM, Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> I would like to get your opinion on an idea regarding the Wicket
> Stuff
> project(s). As you are familiar with, Wicket Stuff is where anyone
> can
> create anything related to Wicket, small or large. One problem that
> new
> users of Wicket (and us "old" users) come across is that there is a
> lot of
> stuff in there, and not all of it is well maintained, and there aren't
> specific releases of many of the projects. So, you have to build it
> yourself and figure out which version matches which Wicket version,
> etc...
>
> What I would like to know is if everyone thinks it would be good to
> have a
> subset of WS projects that are structured in a way that they are
> always in
> sync with the Wicket versions. IOW, there would be two branches -
> 1.3.X and
> 1.4 (trunk), just like Wicket has. There would be a parent module
> and all
> of the modules that wanted to participate would be structured under
> it.
> They would all release in sync with Wicket. For instance, when Wicket
> releases 1.4-RC2, we would cut a release of this wicket-stuff-
> structured
> (bad name) and all of the projects under it at 1.4-RC2. I haven't yet
> figured out how interim releases would work (new features are added
> to a WS
> project and it wants to cut a release between wicket releases) or if
> that
> matters.
>
> This would not have to effect all WS projects - someone could
> continue to
> add projects to WS just like they do today. This would simply
> create a
> sub-tree of projects that are in the structured / scheduled release
> area.
> For those that don't want to be part of that structure, they could
> continue
> operating as they do today.
>
> So, here's the vote:
>
> [ ] - NO! We should leave Wicket Stuff like it is - a free-for-all
> with no
> structure
> [ ] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff
> projects
> structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is produced for
> each
> Wicket release.
> [ ] - Maybe - I have a better idea (perfect!)
>
> Also - please add the following:
> 1 - Would you be interested in helping to maintain such a thing. (If
> we had
> two or three of the owners of the larger projects on board, I don't
> think it
> would be too hard to keep the codebase of this in sync with Wicket
> core.)
> 2 - What projects do you own (and by your vote we'll see if you want
> those
> projects to be included in this restructuring).
>
> --
> Jeremy Thomerson
> http://www.wickettraining.com
RE: [VOTE] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by "Hoover, William " <wh...@nemours.org>.
[X] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff
projects structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is
produced for each Wicket release.
This should be a no-brainer ;o)
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeremy Thomerson [mailto:jeremy@wickettraining.com]
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 1:13 PM
To: users@wicket.apache.org; Wicket Development
Subject: [VOTE] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Hello everyone,
I would like to get your opinion on an idea regarding the Wicket Stuff
project(s). As you are familiar with, Wicket Stuff is where anyone can
create anything related to Wicket, small or large. One problem that new
users of Wicket (and us "old" users) come across is that there is a lot
of stuff in there, and not all of it is well maintained, and there
aren't specific releases of many of the projects. So, you have to build
it yourself and figure out which version matches which Wicket version,
etc...
What I would like to know is if everyone thinks it would be good to
have a subset of WS projects that are structured in a way that they are
always in sync with the Wicket versions. IOW, there would be two
branches - 1.3.X and
1.4 (trunk), just like Wicket has. There would be a parent module and
all of the modules that wanted to participate would be structured under
it.
They would all release in sync with Wicket. For instance, when Wicket
releases 1.4-RC2, we would cut a release of this wicket-stuff-structured
(bad name) and all of the projects under it at 1.4-RC2. I haven't yet
figured out how interim releases would work (new features are added to a
WS project and it wants to cut a release between wicket releases) or if
that matters.
This would not have to effect all WS projects - someone could continue
to add projects to WS just like they do today. This would simply create
a sub-tree of projects that are in the structured / scheduled release
area.
For those that don't want to be part of that structure, they could
continue operating as they do today.
So, here's the vote:
[ ] - NO! We should leave Wicket Stuff like it is - a free-for-all with
no structure [ ] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used
Wicket Stuff projects structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a
release is produced for each Wicket release.
[ ] - Maybe - I have a better idea (perfect!)
Also - please add the following:
1 - Would you be interested in helping to maintain such a thing. (If we
had two or three of the owners of the larger projects on board, I don't
think it would be too hard to keep the codebase of this in sync with
Wicket core.)
2 - What projects do you own (and by your vote we'll see if you want
those projects to be included in this restructuring).
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com
Re: [VOTE] Organizing Wicket Stuff / Regular Release Schedule?
Posted by Marat Radchenko <sl...@gmail.com>.
[X] YES
2008/11/24 Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com>:
> Hello everyone,
> I would like to get your opinion on an idea regarding the Wicket Stuff
> project(s). As you are familiar with, Wicket Stuff is where anyone can
> create anything related to Wicket, small or large. One problem that new
> users of Wicket (and us "old" users) come across is that there is a lot of
> stuff in there, and not all of it is well maintained, and there aren't
> specific releases of many of the projects. So, you have to build it
> yourself and figure out which version matches which Wicket version, etc...
>
> What I would like to know is if everyone thinks it would be good to have a
> subset of WS projects that are structured in a way that they are always in
> sync with the Wicket versions. IOW, there would be two branches - 1.3.X and
> 1.4 (trunk), just like Wicket has. There would be a parent module and all
> of the modules that wanted to participate would be structured under it.
> They would all release in sync with Wicket. For instance, when Wicket
> releases 1.4-RC2, we would cut a release of this wicket-stuff-structured
> (bad name) and all of the projects under it at 1.4-RC2. I haven't yet
> figured out how interim releases would work (new features are added to a WS
> project and it wants to cut a release between wicket releases) or if that
> matters.
>
> This would not have to effect all WS projects - someone could continue to
> add projects to WS just like they do today. This would simply create a
> sub-tree of projects that are in the structured / scheduled release area.
> For those that don't want to be part of that structure, they could continue
> operating as they do today.
>
> So, here's the vote:
>
> [ ] - NO! We should leave Wicket Stuff like it is - a free-for-all with no
> structure
> [ ] - YES - I would like to see at least the most used Wicket Stuff projects
> structured so that they mirror Wicket, and a release is produced for each
> Wicket release.
> [ ] - Maybe - I have a better idea (perfect!)
>
> Also - please add the following:
> 1 - Would you be interested in helping to maintain such a thing. (If we had
> two or three of the owners of the larger projects on board, I don't think it
> would be too hard to keep the codebase of this in sync with Wicket core.)
> 2 - What projects do you own (and by your vote we'll see if you want those
> projects to be included in this restructuring).
>
> --
> Jeremy Thomerson
> http://www.wickettraining.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org