You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@taverna.apache.org by Gale Naylor <Ga...@noventussolutions.com> on 2016/05/13 17:15:09 UTC
Possible changes to groupId, etc?
I buried this in my last "Download Pages" reply, but I wanted to make sure
you all saw it and could comment.
-----------------------------------
Changes to git repo/groupId?
------------------------------------
As far as the GIt repo and groupId names for the Command-line Tool are
concerned,
I agree that keeping "commandline" as one word in the repo, groupId, and
artifacts looks cleaner.
In looking at the repo names and pom.xml files, I wonder if it is
reasonable to change the following:
incubator-taverna-common-activities
--> groupId to org.apache.taverna.common.activities
incubator-taverna-commandline
--> name to Apache Taverna Command-line
incubator-taverna-workbench-common-activities
--> groupId to org.apache.workbench.common.activities
--> artifact to apache-workbench-common-activity
I don't know how difficult it is to manage all the relationships, but it
would be nice if these were consistent.
------------------------------------
Question
------------------------------------
incubator-taverna-workbench-product has the same groupId as
incubator-taverna-workbench. Is this correct?
Re: Possible changes to groupId, etc?
Posted by Gale Naylor <Ga...@noventussolutions.com>.
Excellent! Thanks, Stian. I am working on the Web pages.
On Thu, May 26, 2016, 9:15 AM Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> wrote:
> Done:
>
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-taverna-commandline/commit/b096abbe15ee90dbd5f9c28bb56a3ed64f6b91e6
>
> [INFO] Apache Taverna Command-line Tool ................... SUCCESS [
> 0.150 s]
> [INFO] Apache Taverna Command-line Tool API ............... SUCCESS [
> 0.007 s]
> [INFO] Apache Taverna Command-line Tool Common ............ SUCCESS [
> 0.007 s]
> [INFO] Apache Taverna Command-line Tool Launcher .......... SUCCESS [
> 0.013 s]
> [INFO] Apache Taverna Command-line Tool Product ........... SUCCESS [
> 0.100 s]
>
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-taverna-commandline#apache-taverna-command-line-tool
>
>
>
> On 26 May 2016 at 17:09, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On 26 May 2016 at 17:07, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> We didn't reach a conclusion - perhaps to enable the Release Candidate
> >> now, can we perhaps try:
> >>
> >> a) Stick with the repository names, groupId and package names as-is
> >> b) Update documentation and READMEs to consistently use "Command Line
> >> Tool" in English
> >
> > Now I got it wrong.. we agreed:
> >
> > "Taverna Command-line Tool" in English.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Stian Soiland-Reyes
> > Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
> > http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>
>
>
> --
> Stian Soiland-Reyes
> Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
> http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>
Re: Possible changes to groupId, etc?
Posted by Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>.
Done:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-taverna-commandline/commit/b096abbe15ee90dbd5f9c28bb56a3ed64f6b91e6
[INFO] Apache Taverna Command-line Tool ................... SUCCESS [ 0.150 s]
[INFO] Apache Taverna Command-line Tool API ............... SUCCESS [ 0.007 s]
[INFO] Apache Taverna Command-line Tool Common ............ SUCCESS [ 0.007 s]
[INFO] Apache Taverna Command-line Tool Launcher .......... SUCCESS [ 0.013 s]
[INFO] Apache Taverna Command-line Tool Product ........... SUCCESS [ 0.100 s]
https://github.com/apache/incubator-taverna-commandline#apache-taverna-command-line-tool
On 26 May 2016 at 17:09, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 26 May 2016 at 17:07, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> wrote:
>> We didn't reach a conclusion - perhaps to enable the Release Candidate
>> now, can we perhaps try:
>>
>> a) Stick with the repository names, groupId and package names as-is
>> b) Update documentation and READMEs to consistently use "Command Line
>> Tool" in English
>
> Now I got it wrong.. we agreed:
>
> "Taverna Command-line Tool" in English.
>
>
> --
> Stian Soiland-Reyes
> Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
> http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
--
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
Re: Possible changes to groupId, etc?
Posted by Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>.
On 26 May 2016 at 17:07, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> wrote:
> We didn't reach a conclusion - perhaps to enable the Release Candidate
> now, can we perhaps try:
>
> a) Stick with the repository names, groupId and package names as-is
> b) Update documentation and READMEs to consistently use "Command Line
> Tool" in English
Now I got it wrong.. we agreed:
"Taverna Command-line Tool" in English.
--
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
Re: Possible changes to groupId, etc?
Posted by Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>.
We didn't reach a conclusion - perhaps to enable the Release Candidate
now, can we perhaps try:
a) Stick with the repository names, groupId and package names as-is
b) Update documentation and READMEs to consistently use "Command Line
Tool" in English
?
On 16 May 2016 at 11:11, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 15 May 2016 at 23:25, Gale Naylor <Ga...@noventussolutions.com> wrote:
>> See comments/questions below.
>> -----------------------
>> (1) Regarding
>>> --> groupId org.apache.taverna.common.activities
>> being a misleading hierarchy: If I understand what Stian said, the issue is
>> that *taverna-language* exists on its own and *taverna-engine* exists on
>> its own, but there is no separate entity called "taverna-common" --- OK.
>> Makes sense.
>>
>> Do we then want to change the repo names to match the groupIds?
>> Change:
>> incubator-taverna-common-activities to
>> incubator-taverna-commonactivities?
>> and
>> incubator-taverna-workbench-common-activities to
>> incubator-taverna-workbench-commonactivities?
>
> 0 - I'm OK with either, but would prefer *-common-activities as it is
> easier to read.
>
> If we do the rename, then I think we should do it now before preparing
> the engine/activities/commandline RC.
>
>
>> (2) On a related note: I'm sure there's a reason, but I'm curious why
>> taverna-common-activities is not called taverna-engine-common-activities
>> based on the git source description: "Common activity implementation for
>> engine (e.g. WSDL, REST, Tool, Interaction)"?
>
> I think the only reason is that it's a bit long :)
>
> But then again incubator-taverna-workbench-common-activities is also
> long.. taverna-engine-common-activities would show a bit clearer the
> duality.
>
> And it's right that (except for wsdl-generic) they don't make sense
> outside the engine, and are effectively plugins for the engine.
>
> BTW - you could in theory drop the word "common" from both - but that
> would imply that those are all the activities - but we have several
> others just in our own plugins.
>
> (We used to have a misleadingly called "all-activities"
> meta-dependency in 2.5 - it did pull in most of the official
> activities, but not all of them!)
>
>
> --
> Stian Soiland-Reyes
> Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating)
> http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
--
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
Re: Possible changes to groupId, etc?
Posted by Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>.
On 15 May 2016 at 23:25, Gale Naylor <Ga...@noventussolutions.com> wrote:
> See comments/questions below.
> -----------------------
> (1) Regarding
>> --> groupId org.apache.taverna.common.activities
> being a misleading hierarchy: If I understand what Stian said, the issue is
> that *taverna-language* exists on its own and *taverna-engine* exists on
> its own, but there is no separate entity called "taverna-common" --- OK.
> Makes sense.
>
> Do we then want to change the repo names to match the groupIds?
> Change:
> incubator-taverna-common-activities to
> incubator-taverna-commonactivities?
> and
> incubator-taverna-workbench-common-activities to
> incubator-taverna-workbench-commonactivities?
0 - I'm OK with either, but would prefer *-common-activities as it is
easier to read.
If we do the rename, then I think we should do it now before preparing
the engine/activities/commandline RC.
> (2) On a related note: I'm sure there's a reason, but I'm curious why
> taverna-common-activities is not called taverna-engine-common-activities
> based on the git source description: "Common activity implementation for
> engine (e.g. WSDL, REST, Tool, Interaction)"?
I think the only reason is that it's a bit long :)
But then again incubator-taverna-workbench-common-activities is also
long.. taverna-engine-common-activities would show a bit clearer the
duality.
And it's right that (except for wsdl-generic) they don't make sense
outside the engine, and are effectively plugins for the engine.
BTW - you could in theory drop the word "common" from both - but that
would imply that those are all the activities - but we have several
others just in our own plugins.
(We used to have a misleadingly called "all-activities"
meta-dependency in 2.5 - it did pull in most of the official
activities, but not all of them!)
--
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating)
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
Re: Possible changes to groupId, etc?
Posted by Gale Naylor <Ga...@noventussolutions.com>.
See comments/questions below.
-----------------------
(1) Regarding
> --> groupId org.apache.taverna.common.activities
being a misleading hierarchy: If I understand what Stian said, the issue is
that *taverna-language* exists on its own and *taverna-engine* exists on
its own, but there is no separate entity called "taverna-common" --- OK.
Makes sense.
Do we then want to change the repo names to match the groupIds?
Change:
incubator-taverna-common-activities to
incubator-taverna-commonactivities?
and
incubator-taverna-workbench-common-activities to
incubator-taverna-workbench-commonactivities?
-----------------------
(2) On a related note: I'm sure there's a reason, but I'm curious why
taverna-common-activities is not called taverna-engine-common-activities
based on the git source description: "Common activity implementation for
engine (e.g. WSDL, REST, Tool, Interaction)"?
-----------------------
(3) Regarding wanting workbench-product to have a different groupID than
workbench:
+1 for calling it incubator-taverna-workbench-product rather than
workbench-distro. I think that makes it consistent with all of the other
git repo names / groupIds.
Gale
On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 2:36 AM Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>
wrote:
> On 13 May 2016 6:15 p.m., "Gale Naylor" <Ga...@noventussolutions.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I buried this in my last "Download Pages" reply, but I wanted to make
> sure
> > you all saw it and could comment.
>
> Thanks, it's good to spin out new threads :)
>
> > -----------------------------------
> > Changes to git repo/groupId?
> > ------------------------------------
> > As far as the GIt repo and groupId names for the Command-line Tool are
> > concerned,
> > I agree that keeping "commandline" as one word in the repo, groupId, and
> > artifacts looks cleaner.
>
> +1
>
> > In looking at the repo names and pom.xml files, I wonder if it is
> > reasonable to change the following:
> >
> > incubator-taverna-common-activities
> > --> groupId to org.apache.taverna.common.activities
>
> I would -1 this as misleading hierarchy, as we have no other .common.*.
>
> Perhaps commonactivities? Problem with - is that it can't appear in Java
> package name, however in common activities they all have their own package
> names.
>
> > incubator-taverna-commandline
> > --> name to Apache Taverna Command-line
>
> +1
>
> > incubator-taverna-workbench-common-activities
> > --> groupId to org.apache.workbench.common.activities
> > --> artifact to apache-workbench-common-activity
> >
> > I don't know how difficult it is to manage all the relationships, but it
> > would be nice if these were consistent.
>
> Should match the engine common activities.
>
> > ------------------------------------
> > Question
> > ------------------------------------
> > incubator-taverna-workbench-product has the same groupId as
> > incubator-taverna-workbench. Is this correct?
>
> Probably not, I think our new style has a 1:1 mapping (if not literal)
> between groupId and repository.
>
> This repo is special in that it relies on Workbench and Workbench Common
> Activities, but it is the distribution of the Workbench. So dependency wise
> it has to live outside the Workbench to avoid circular dependencies.
>
> Shall we call it workbench.product in the groupId ? Or distro?
>
Re: Possible changes to groupId, etc?
Posted by Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>.
On 13 May 2016 6:15 p.m., "Gale Naylor" <Ga...@noventussolutions.com> wrote:
>
> I buried this in my last "Download Pages" reply, but I wanted to make
sure
> you all saw it and could comment.
Thanks, it's good to spin out new threads :)
> -----------------------------------
> Changes to git repo/groupId?
> ------------------------------------
> As far as the GIt repo and groupId names for the Command-line Tool are
> concerned,
> I agree that keeping "commandline" as one word in the repo, groupId, and
> artifacts looks cleaner.
+1
> In looking at the repo names and pom.xml files, I wonder if it is
> reasonable to change the following:
>
> incubator-taverna-common-activities
> --> groupId to org.apache.taverna.common.activities
I would -1 this as misleading hierarchy, as we have no other .common.*.
Perhaps commonactivities? Problem with - is that it can't appear in Java
package name, however in common activities they all have their own package
names.
> incubator-taverna-commandline
> --> name to Apache Taverna Command-line
+1
> incubator-taverna-workbench-common-activities
> --> groupId to org.apache.workbench.common.activities
> --> artifact to apache-workbench-common-activity
>
> I don't know how difficult it is to manage all the relationships, but it
> would be nice if these were consistent.
Should match the engine common activities.
> ------------------------------------
> Question
> ------------------------------------
> incubator-taverna-workbench-product has the same groupId as
> incubator-taverna-workbench. Is this correct?
Probably not, I think our new style has a 1:1 mapping (if not literal)
between groupId and repository.
This repo is special in that it relies on Workbench and Workbench Common
Activities, but it is the distribution of the Workbench. So dependency wise
it has to live outside the Workbench to avoid circular dependencies.
Shall we call it workbench.product in the groupId ? Or distro?