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

[Serge Emmanuel Pagop]

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
> **************************************
>