[dna-dev] Re: Proposal: new sandbox area for DNA

Tue Dec 2 11:56:55 EST 2008

Any other comments?  If not, I'll go ahead and create an issue to make  
this change at the end of the release.

On Nov 25, 2008, at 4:35 PM, Serge Emmanuel Pagop wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I agree with that proposal with the sandbox area, then dna should be  
> release with the most stable subprojects and definition of stable  
> can only be define by the project leader depend on with features the  
> subproject  has to at the least provide.
> For me because of the youthfulness of DNA project, we can also  
> release all subproject, that provide a minimun upon functionalities,  
> so that we can win some contributors in the community. Of Course "a  
> minimun upon functionalities" has also to be defined.
>
> Best regards,
> Serge.
>
>> Send dna-dev mailing list submissions to
>> 	dna-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> 	https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/dna-dev
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> 	dna-dev-request at lists.jboss.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> 	dna-dev-owner at lists.jboss.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of dna-dev digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>  1. Proposal: new sandbox area for DNA (Randall Hauch)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 11:47:08 -0600
>> From: Randall Hauch <rhauch at redhat.com>
>> Subject: [dna-dev] Proposal: new sandbox area for DNA
>> To: JBoss DNA <dna-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>> Message-ID: <00474E51-4FBF-4957-937B-B6B8AE4194CD at redhat.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>
>> I've been wondering recently how to distinguish the (Maven)
>> subprojects under trunk that are ready for use vs. those that are
>> still under development.  In fact, it's not even only the source
>> organization, as our release binaries have included all projects
>> (regardless of their state).  I've tried to note the status in the
>> documentation, but I think that is insufficient and we need something
>> that is more formal, obvious, and intuitive for users.
>>
>> The 0.3 release included several projects that were not really "ready
>> for use":
>> dna-sequencer-cnd
>> dna-sequencer-esbMessage
>> dna-sequencer-jbpm-jpdl
>> dna-connector-svn
>>
>> And since the 0.3 release we have started (or will so be starting)
>> several new subprojects:
>> dna-connector-store-jpa
>> dna-connector-jdbc-metadata (soon to be created)
>>
>> So, here's my proposal:  we'd create in SVN a new "sandbox" directory
>> under the "trunk" directory, and in this area is generally where
>> subprojects would live until they are "mature enough" to move outside
>> of the "sandbox".  In some cases, "mature enough" means that they are
>> indeed complete, while in other cases they may be far enough along  
>> and
>> there's commitment to finish them before the next release.  I'd
>> anticipate that we'd be flexible on what "mature enough" means and
>> decide on a case-by-case basis as a community when a sandbox project
>> is "mature enough" on a case-by-case basis (although ultimately the
>> project lead would have the final say).  However, sandbox projects
>> would be excluded from the binary release assembly (but maybe  
>> included
>> in the source assembly?) and would not be mentioned in the Getting
>> Started document, and all mentions in the Reference Guide would be
>> moved to a new chapter covering the sandbox.
>>
>> Also, with this proposal, I'd think we would still keep all of the
>> sandbox projects in our development environments (unless other wise
>> requested by a project's developers).  And these sandbox projects
>> would still included in the Maven builds and Hudson CI jobs.
>>
>> Here's a strawman list of existing extensions that could be moved  
>> into
>> the "sandbox", based purely upon my understanding of where these
>> projects are and the plans to complete them by 0.4:
>> dna-classloader-maven (complete, but to be of any use it really needs
>> additional components, like perhaps a Maven or SVN connector)
>> dna-sequencer-cnd
>> dna-sequencer-esbMessage
>> dna-sequencer-jbpm-jpdl
>> dna-connector-jdbc-metadata (soon to be created)
>> dna-sequencer-jdbc-metadata (actually, this is to be removed)
>>
>> These projects would stay in "trunk", since they are planned to be
>> completed for 0.4:
>> dna-connector-svn
>> dna-connector-store-jpa
>>
>> Forgive me if my understanding of the state of these projects is
>> wrong.  If that's the case, please speak up and correct me.
>>
>> So, what do you think of this proposal?  Please weigh in with your
>> thoughts and opinions about the proposal and the suggested list of
>> "sandbox" subprojects.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Randall
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/dna-dev/attachments/20081123/20577752/attachment-0001.html
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dna-dev mailing list
>> dna-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/dna-dev
>>
>>
>> End of dna-dev Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17
>> **************************************
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dna-dev mailing list
> dna-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/dna-dev