Re: [jdf-dev] New versioning and organisation strategy

>> We definitely plan to have archetypes for WF8, just in the sandbox, not in the main repo. > > coming back from pto and its great there will be archetypes for WF8 but that doesn't solve the problem of knowing which of now potentially many archetypes for a javaee web app should be used front and center in JBDS Central and we'll need to have maven.enterprise.redhat.com added to users settings.xml for them to work. > Before we had a default one which could switch between community and product - what do we use in replacement for that 'ease-of-use' feature ? Haven't we previously agreed to do this using stacks?

> /max > >>> >>> Now I'm on pto - see you 3 weeks. >>> >>> /max (sent from my phone) >>> >>> >>>> On 04/07/2013, at 16.23, Rafael Benevides <benevides(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>>> >>>> After considering the feedback and after more brainstorming over the migration plan, we have a now a more detailed and tunned proposal on the new versioning and organization strategy. In the attached PDF you will find this detailed plan with all artifacts changes needed. >>>> >>>> It's also a good opportunity to update stacks.yaml format (and client) to 1.1.0 >>>> >>>> Please, take a look on the attached plan and let us know what you think about it. The migration work should start by now on developer branches. >>>> >>>> Thank you >>>> >>>> Em 25/04/13 14:18, Rafael Benevides escreveu: >>>>> One thing that came in my mind is when to move the versions of Archetypes, Runtimes and BOMs to Stacks.yaml? >>>>> >>>>> I used to add only .Final (will be -bom-x) version of BOMs to Stacks.yaml. >>>>> >>>>> In the Case of Archetypes, I'm continuously updating it to the latest version (even being a CR - Candidate Release). >>>>> >>>>> For Runtimes, starting by EAP 6.1 Alpha (them Beta), I'm adding it with the "Early Access" label. >>>>> >>>>> Do we still follow this schema ? >>>>> >>>>> BOM: Only -bom-X release ? >>>>> Archetypes: Every -atype-X release ? >>>>> Runtime: Every "Early Access" and Product release ? >>>>> >>>>> By the way? How will we differ the "Candidate Release" from ".Final" Release ? >>>>> >>>>> Em 25/04/13 11:20, Marek Novotny escreveu: >>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>>> Hash: SHA1 >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 04/25/2013 04:13 PM, Pete Muir wrote: >>>>>>>> On 25 Apr 2013, at 14:46, Max Rydahl Andersen <manderse(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Trying to grok consequences. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On first read it seems it does not change anything - stacks.yml will just refer to these and we can use them. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But will the archetypes still support enterprise=true|false flag ? >>>>>>> No. They will be product only. There may be other upstream community archetypes, but they will be project specifically. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Will -qs-1 be adjusted to -qs-1-redhat-NN pattern when put into products or does that go away for these cases? >>>>>>> No, these are the product BOMs. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We would no longer bundle them in the product zip repos, instead just deliver them online via maven.repository.redhat.com >>>>>> that supposes to finish/change the uploading process as >>>>>> maven.repository.redhat.com's content is currently only extracted >>>>>> product zips. >>>>>>>> /max >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 10:55:44AM +0100, Pete Muir wrote: >>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Rafael, Jason and I did a brainstorm about this at JUDCon Brazil, and came up with the following proposal: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> * jdf plugin for forge - longer term needs rolling into Forge core. This is issue https://issues.jboss.org/browse/FORGE-378. As this is proposed for Forge 2, we suggest not altering the version or group id of this plugin >>>>>>>>> * qstools - version scheme (starting 1.x) is good. Alter group id when we do the next major release only >>>>>>>>> * quickstarts >>>>>>>>> - change group id to follow products: >>>>>>>>> - org.jboss.quickstart.eap, org.jboss.quickstart.jdg etc. >>>>>>>>> - add a sandbox group id which covers quickstarts not in products >>>>>>>>> - change versions to follow products major.minor.micro version, with a qualifier to allow bug fixes: >>>>>>>>> - e.g. 6.0.1-qs-1, 6.0.1-qs-2 etc >>>>>>>>> * archetypes >>>>>>>>> - use group id scheme same as quickstarts but use org.jboss.archetype.eap etc. >>>>>>>>> - follow same version scheme as quickstarts, but use -atype-1 etc. >>>>>>>>> * BOMs >>>>>>>>> - use group id scheme same as quickstarts but use org.jboss.bom.eap etc. >>>>>>>>> - follow same version scheme as quickstarts, but use -bom-1 >>>>>>>>> - projects will be encouraged to create BOMs as well >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Let me know what you think, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Pete >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> jdf-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> jdf-dev mailing list >>>>>>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev >>>>>> >>>>>> - -- Marek Novotny >>>>>> - -- WFK and Seam Product Lead >>>>>> >>>>>> Red Hat Czech s.r.o. >>>>>> Purkynova 99 >>>>>> 612 45 Brno >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> jdf-dev mailing list >>>>>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev >>>> >>>> <Newversionandorganizationstrategy.pdf> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> jdf-dev mailing list >>>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev >> _______________________________________________ jdf-dev mailing list jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev