[jbosstools-issues] [JBoss JIRA] (JBIDE-12475) Split JBoss Tools into several functional groups of components for migration to Github

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBIDE-12475?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugi... ] Nick Boldt updated JBIDE-12475: ------------------------------- Description: As part of the planned migration to git [0] it's been suggested that we combine some of the existing components into larger groups [1] so that it's more manageable in terms of checking out sources and tagging/branching [2]. Because 25 is a large number, and 1 is a small number, and we need some happy compromise. Here's my proposal for how to divide the JBT 4.0 sources into 7 github repos (chunks), comprising 4 tiers of dependency. This is akin to the +0, +1, +2, +3 labels assigned to projects within the annual Eclipse release trains [3], used to define delivery times based on dependencies between projects. {code:title=TIER 0: no upstream JBoss.org chunks} Base = tests + common + usage {code} {code:title=TIER 1: 1 upstream chunk, Base} AppServer = openshift + as + archives + jmx + ws -> depends on Base Hibernate/Birt/Freemarker = hibernate + birt + freemarker -> depends on Base Visual Editing = vpe + xulrunner + gwt + struts + jsf + jst + cdi -> depends on Base Forge = forge -> Depends on Base {code} {code:title=TIER 2: 4 upstream chunks} Seam/Runtime = Seam + Runtime -> depends on Hib + Vis + AppServer + Base {code} {code:title=TIER 3: 5 upstream chunks} Central/Examples/Maven/Portlet = central + examples + maven + portlet -> depends on Seam/Runtime + Hib + Vis + AppServer + Base {code} I'm not thrilled with the names of the chunks, as something like "Central/Examples/Maven/Portlet" doesn't exactly roll off the tongue. If you have better names for the chunks, please suggest them. But regardless of name, I think the above separation of concerns, and the implied build sequence workflow makes a lot of sense. [0] http://tinyurl.com/git-migration-plan [1] http://ether-man.rhcloud.com/p/build.next [2] http://ether-man.rhcloud.com/p/jbosstools-2012-08-23 [3] http://wiki.eclipse.org/Juno/Simultaneous_Release_Plan#Milestones_and_Rel... - "These delivery times are based on the dependencies between projects. They are labeled +0, +1, +2, and +3, with +0 coming first (the Platform) and +3 coming last (EPP). Projects themselves decide if they are +0, +1, +2, or +3." was: As part of the planned migration to git [0] it's been suggested that we combine some of the existing components into larger groups [1] so that it's more manageable in terms of checking out sources and tagging/branching [2]. Because 25 is a large number, and 1 is a small number, and we need some happy compromise. Here's my proposal for how to divide the JBT 4.0 sources into 7 github repos (chunks), comprising 4 tiers of dependency. This is akin to the +0, +1, +2, +3 labels assigned to projects within the annual Eclipse release trains [3], used to define delivery times based on dependencies between projects. {code:title=TIER 0: no upstream JBoss.org chunks} Base = tests + common + usage {code} {code:title=TIER 1: 1 upstream chunk, Base} AppServer = openshift + as + archives + jmx -> depends on Base Hibernate/Birt/Freemarker = hibernate + birt + freemarker -> depends on Base Visual Editing = vpe + xulrunner + gwt + struts + jsf + jst + cdi -> depends on Base Web Services = WS + Forge -> Depends on Base {code} {code:title=TIER 2: 4 upstream chunks} Seam/Runtime = Seam + Runtime -> depends on Hib + Vis + AppServer + Base {code} {code:title=TIER 3: 5 upstream chunks} Central/Examples/Maven/Portlet = central + examples + maven + portlet -> depends on Seam/Runtime + Hib + Vis + AppServer + Base {code} I'm not thrilled with the names of the chunks, as something like "Central/Examples/Maven/Portlet" doesn't exactly roll off the tongue. If you have better names for the chunks, please suggest them. But regardless of name, I think the above separation of concerns, and the implied build sequence workflow makes a lot of sense. [0] http://tinyurl.com/git-migration-plan [1] http://ether-man.rhcloud.com/p/build.next [2] http://ether-man.rhcloud.com/p/jbosstools-2012-08-23 [3] http://wiki.eclipse.org/Juno/Simultaneous_Release_Plan#Milestones_and_Rel... - "These delivery times are based on the dependencies between projects. They are labeled +0, +1, +2, and +3, with +0 coming first (the Platform) and +3 coming last (EPP). Projects themselves decide if they are +0, +1, +2, or +3." Note that in my previous statement of this issue, I had incorrectly omitted the dependency of WS on AS, so to alleviate that I've moved WS into the AppServer chunk. Forge now stands alone. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.jboss.org/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira