2:30 p.m.
Just a heads up to everyone about a slight SVN restructuring - I've
moved each of the Seam modules (previously in /repos/seam/modules/trunk)
into their own "top level" project. So for example, Seam PDF is now in
/repos/seam/modules/pdf/trunk, Seam Mail is in /seam/modules/mail/trunk,
etc. This will give us better control over the release cycle (tagging,
etc) for individual modules, and also allow us to branch individual
modules.
We've still got some cleaning up to do and it's even questionable as to
whether some modules should even still be there, however you can expect
some major refinement over the next month or so.
Shane
1:14 p.m.
Shane and I went through the modules just now and pruned out the ones that aren't
needed. We also removed places where there was old/partially completed code. Next, I will
spend a little time on getting the build looking good, as well as adding a maven archetype
to create a new module.
Hopefully this structure is looking much cleaner now :-)
On 6 Dec 2009, at 13:30, Shane Bryzak wrote:
Just a heads up to everyone about a slight SVN restructuring -
I've
moved each of the Seam modules (previously in /repos/seam/modules/trunk)
into their own "top level" project. So for example, Seam PDF is now in
/repos/seam/modules/pdf/trunk, Seam Mail is in /seam/modules/mail/trunk,
etc. This will give us better control over the release cycle (tagging,
etc) for individual modules, and also allow us to branch individual
modules.
We've still got some cleaning up to do and it's even questionable as to
whether some modules should even still be there, however you can expect
some major refinement over the next month or so.
Shane
_______________________________________________
seam-dev mailing list
seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
7:07 a.m.
Shane and Pete,
I like the new structure, it makes a lot more sense. However, this is one
major problem. During the restructuring, the seam-parent got nuked. I don't
see it anywhere, so I'm going to assume it was an oversight.
As we try to get this thing off the ground, I think there is one crucial
aspect that needs to be resolved first and foremost (which I think is what
you were implying, Pete, in your last response). We need to get a solid
seam-parent and seam-bom (or whatever the version matrix now called). I'm
looking at Weld and I can't figure out how that maps back to Seam. Here is
one approach:
build/trunk/parent/pom.xml
build/trunk/bom/pom.xml
But I don't know if that's how you want it.
Ultimately, the modules should have a pom which looks something like:
<project>
<parent>
<groupId>org.jboss.seam</groupId>
<artifactId>seam-parent</artifactId>
<version>1</version>
</parent>
...
<groupId>org.jboss.seam</groupId>
<artifactId>seam-XXX</artifactId>
<packaging>jar</packaging>
<version>3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
...
<dependencyManagement>
<dependencies>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.jboss.seam</groupId>
<artifactId>seam-bom</artifactId>
<version>${seam.version}</version>
<type>pom</type>
<scope>import</scope>
</dependency>
</dependencyManagement>
....
</project>
This needs to be resolved or I can't bring contributors into the project
because I just don't know what to tell them to do. And we have contributors
waiting at the door. The time is ripe ;)
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
7:09 a.m.
I'd like to get the faces module building soon, which I'll do as soon as
we've worked out the inheritance hierarchy for parent and bom. There will be
some piecing back together, but that's fine. The previous incarnation of
Seam 3 was really just a sandbox/prototype. Now that we have stable specs,
we won't have all that crazy code in there ;)
-Dan
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 1:07 AM, Dan Allen <dan.j.allen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Shane and Pete,
I like the new structure, it makes a lot more sense. However, this is one
major problem. During the restructuring, the seam-parent got nuked. I don't
see it anywhere, so I'm going to assume it was an oversight.
As we try to get this thing off the ground, I think there is one crucial
aspect that needs to be resolved first and foremost (which I think is what
you were implying, Pete, in your last response). We need to get a solid
seam-parent and seam-bom (or whatever the version matrix now called). I'm
looking at Weld and I can't figure out how that maps back to Seam. Here is
one approach:
build/trunk/parent/pom.xml
build/trunk/bom/pom.xml
But I don't know if that's how you want it.
Ultimately, the modules should have a pom which looks something like:
<project>
<parent>
<groupId>org.jboss.seam</groupId>
<artifactId>seam-parent</artifactId>
<version>1</version>
</parent>
...
<groupId>org.jboss.seam</groupId>
<artifactId>seam-XXX</artifactId>
<packaging>jar</packaging>
<version>3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
...
<dependencyManagement>
<dependencies>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.jboss.seam</groupId>
<artifactId>seam-bom</artifactId>
<version>${seam.version}</version>
<type>pom</type>
<scope>import</scope>
</dependency>
</dependencyManagement>
....
</project>
This needs to be resolved or I can't bring contributors into the project
because I just don't know what to tell them to do. And we have contributors
waiting at the door. The time is ripe ;)
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
7:52 a.m.
We also need to get a wiki page together than explains to someone
step-by-step how to build Seam 3 and start hacking on it (one that is up to
date). I don't mind putting it together, or working with a community member
on it, but first I need to know what I'm writing.
Again, don't mean to pressure, I'm just saying that I have people e-mailing
me asking to get started, and I have to tell them to just wait.
-Dan
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 1:07 AM, Dan Allen <dan.j.allen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Shane and Pete,
I like the new structure, it makes a lot more sense. However, this is one
major problem. During the restructuring, the seam-parent got nuked. I don't
see it anywhere, so I'm going to assume it was an oversight.
As we try to get this thing off the ground, I think there is one crucial
aspect that needs to be resolved first and foremost (which I think is what
you were implying, Pete, in your last response). We need to get a solid
seam-parent and seam-bom (or whatever the version matrix now called). I'm
looking at Weld and I can't figure out how that maps back to Seam. Here is
one approach:
build/trunk/parent/pom.xml
build/trunk/bom/pom.xml
But I don't know if that's how you want it.
Ultimately, the modules should have a pom which looks something like:
<project>
<parent>
<groupId>org.jboss.seam</groupId>
<artifactId>seam-parent</artifactId>
<version>1</version>
</parent>
...
<groupId>org.jboss.seam</groupId>
<artifactId>seam-XXX</artifactId>
<packaging>jar</packaging>
<version>3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
...
<dependencyManagement>
<dependencies>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.jboss.seam</groupId>
<artifactId>seam-bom</artifactId>
<version>${seam.version}</version>
<type>pom</type>
<scope>import</scope>
</dependency>
</dependencyManagement>
....
</project>
This needs to be resolved or I can't bring contributors into the project
because I just don't know what to tell them to do. And we have contributors
waiting at the door. The time is ripe ;)
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
8:23 a.m.
Again, don't mean to pressure, I'm just saying that I have
people e-mailing
me asking to get started, and I have to tell them to just wait.
I agree, it is better to have nothing that compiles fine and then add
stuff than to have everything there and most stuff is b0rken ,-)
---
Nik
9:45 a.m.
We need to update this page:
http://www.seamframework.org/Documentation/Seam3Build
On 11/12/09 16:52, Dan Allen wrote:
We also need to get a wiki page together than explains to someone
step-by-step how to build Seam 3 and start hacking on it (one that is
up to date). I don't mind putting it together, or working with a
community member on it, but first I need to know what I'm writing.
Again, don't mean to pressure, I'm just saying that I have people
e-mailing me asking to get started, and I have to tell them to just wait.
-Dan
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 1:07 AM, Dan Allen <dan.j.allen(a)gmail.com
<mailto:dan.j.allen@gmail.com>> wrote:
Shane and Pete,
I like the new structure, it makes a lot more sense. However, this
is one major problem. During the restructuring, the seam-parent
got nuked. I don't see it anywhere, so I'm going to assume it was
an oversight.
As we try to get this thing off the ground, I think there is one
crucial aspect that needs to be resolved first and foremost (which
I think is what you were implying, Pete, in your last response).
We need to get a solid seam-parent and seam-bom (or whatever the
version matrix now called). I'm looking at Weld and I can't figure
out how that maps back to Seam. Here is one approach:
build/trunk/parent/pom.xml
build/trunk/bom/pom.xml
But I don't know if that's how you want it.
Ultimately, the modules should have a pom which looks something like:
<project>
<parent>
<groupId>org.jboss.seam</groupId>
<artifactId>seam-parent</artifactId>
<version>1</version>
</parent>
...
<groupId>org.jboss.seam</groupId>
<artifactId>seam-XXX</artifactId>
<packaging>jar</packaging>
<version>3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
...
<dependencyManagement>
<dependencies>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.jboss.seam</groupId>
<artifactId>seam-bom</artifactId>
<version>${seam.version}</version>
<type>pom</type>
<scope>import</scope>
</dependency>
</dependencyManagement>
....
</project>
This needs to be resolved or I can't bring contributors into the
project because I just don't know what to tell them to do. And we
have contributors waiting at the door. The time is ripe ;)
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
4:19 p.m.
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 3:45 AM, Shane Bryzak <sbryzak(a)redhat.com> wrote:
We need to update this page:
http://www.seamframework.org/Documentation/Seam3Build
Right, I've got the page up already. Just not sure what to type in it ;)
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
10:27 a.m.
Pete and I removed the parent and version matrix modules as part of the
module cleanup. I'm not sure what the ultimate intent is here, Pete
said he was going to work on the build so I guess he can let us know
when he's back next week.
This shouldn't stop us in the meantime, it just means we need to remove
the dependency to parent from whatever module we want to build (and add
the version numbers). We can always add the parent in later.
On 11/12/09 16:07, Dan Allen wrote:
Shane and Pete,
I like the new structure, it makes a lot more sense. However, this is
one major problem. During the restructuring, the seam-parent got
nuked. I don't see it anywhere, so I'm going to assume it was an
oversight.
As we try to get this thing off the ground, I think there is one
crucial aspect that needs to be resolved first and foremost (which I
think is what you were implying, Pete, in your last response). We need
to get a solid seam-parent and seam-bom (or whatever the version
matrix now called). I'm looking at Weld and I can't figure out how
that maps back to Seam. Here is one approach:
build/trunk/parent/pom.xml
build/trunk/bom/pom.xml
But I don't know if that's how you want it.
Ultimately, the modules should have a pom which looks something like:
<project>
<parent>
<groupId>org.jboss.seam</groupId>
<artifactId>seam-parent</artifactId>
<version>1</version>
</parent>
...
<groupId>org.jboss.seam</groupId>
<artifactId>seam-XXX</artifactId>
<packaging>jar</packaging>
<version>3.0.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
...
<dependencyManagement>
<dependencies>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.jboss.seam</groupId>
<artifactId>seam-bom</artifactId>
<version>${seam.version}</version>
<type>pom</type>
<scope>import</scope>
</dependency>
</dependencyManagement>
....
</project>
This needs to be resolved or I can't bring contributors into the
project because I just don't know what to tell them to do. And we have
contributors waiting at the door. The time is ripe ;)
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
4:22 p.m.
I got the stuff building by restoring parent/pom.xml and deploying in to the
repository. I think we should restore it until we have a replacement.
Otherwise, working modules like remoting can't be built.
I couldn't check in build/parent/pom.xml, though, because it says I don't
have write permissions. I'm not sure what happened there.
Also, I thought we were moving to Git anyway. Since Seam 3 is totally
borked, why not just make the move now? I communicated with a lot of folks
about this vision of autonomous forks and I'd like to see that become a
reality.
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
4:22 p.m.
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Dan Allen <dan.j.allen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I got the stuff building by restoring parent/pom.xml and deploying in
to
the repository.
^ my local
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
5:13 p.m.
Dan,
I support the move to git. I think it will help the community contribute
easier and provide the committers to have more control over what goes into
the master branch. It's a lot easier to work with distributed, published
repos, than with a ton of patch files.
Piotr
Dan Allen (mojavelinux) wrote:
[...]
Also, I thought we were moving to Git anyway. Since Seam 3 is totally
borked, why not just make the move now? I communicated with a lot of folks
about this vision of autonomous forks and I'd like to see that become a
reality.
[...]
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Modules-have-been-moved-tp26665036p26746964.html
Sent from the seam-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
5:41 p.m.
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:13 AM, psteininger <piotr.steininger(a)gmail.com>wrote:
Dan,
I support the move to git. I think it will help the community contribute
easier and provide the committers to have more control over what goes into
the master branch. It's a lot easier to work with distributed, published
repos, than with a ton of patch files.
Indeed. We could cite a number of other benefits as well, such as being able
to develop locally and to share prototypes w/ collaborators before having to
worry about pushing upstream. There have actually been some long threads
discussing all of these benefits, so I won't try to rehash it all.
The motion I'm suggesting at this point is, let's just cut over now. No one
can build these modules anyway (unless they have seam-parent stashed away in
a local Maven repo), so let's just make the leap.
Another reason is that the Seam repository in general is so screwy right now
with a ton of restructures (just look at FishEye to see the bizarre history)
that we should just break away from it. I don't mean to sound downtrodden,
this should be seen as an opportunity!
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
5:53 p.m.
The plan is to probably move to github, although we are going to do some
(prudent) evaluation first.
On 12/12/09 02:41, Dan Allen wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:13 AM, psteininger
<piotr.steininger(a)gmail.com <mailto:piotr.steininger@gmail.com>> wrote:
Dan,
I support the move to git. I think it will help the community
contribute
easier and provide the committers to have more control over what
goes into
the master branch. It's a lot easier to work with distributed,
published
repos, than with a ton of patch files.
Indeed. We could cite a number of other benefits as well, such as
being able to develop locally and to share prototypes w/ collaborators
before having to worry about pushing upstream. There have actually
been some long threads discussing all of these benefits, so I won't
try to rehash it all.
The motion I'm suggesting at this point is, let's just cut over now.
No one can build these modules anyway (unless they have seam-parent
stashed away in a local Maven repo), so let's just make the leap.
Another reason is that the Seam repository in general is so screwy
right now with a ton of restructures (just look at FishEye to see the
bizarre history) that we should just break away from it. I don't mean
to sound downtrodden, this should be seen as an opportunity!
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
_______________________________________________
seam-dev mailing list
seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
6:04 p.m.
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Shane Bryzak <sbryzak(a)redhat.com> wrote:
The plan is to probably move to github, although we are going to do
some
(prudent) evaluation first.
We'll of course wait for Pete to return on Monday because we can't decide
anything without him, and likely he makes the final call anyway. But I still
vote that we just go for it. We have gotten tons of feedback about github
and while there have been great arguments for Mercurial, I think we can all
agree that both are better than SVN and github is well run. If worse comes
to worse, we can make another move, but all signs just point to doing it.
So let's hang until Monday, see what Pete says, but if need be, we can do a
vote on the list and just bite the bullet.
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
8:02 p.m.
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Nicklas Karlsson <nickarls(a)gmail.com>wrote:
> So let's hang until Monday, see what Pete says, but if need
be, we can do
a
> vote on the list and just bite the bullet.
From what I recall of his postings, he was git-friendly so I have a
hard time thinking we would mind if we went ahead with it. Well, you
;-)
I would really feel wrong moving forward while Pete is not here. I can hold
off until he comes back on Monday ;)
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
8:05 p.m.
Pete explicitly stated that he wanted to try it out first. And there's
not really a rush on this, we can migrate the repository at any time and
it's not like svn is holding us up from getting anything done.
On 12/12/09 05:02, Dan Allen wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Nicklas Karlsson
<nickarls(a)gmail.com
<mailto:nickarls@gmail.com>> wrote:
> So let's hang until Monday, see what Pete says, but if need be,
we can do a
> vote on the list and just bite the bullet.
From what I recall of his postings, he was git-friendly so I have a
hard time thinking we would mind if we went ahead with it. Well, you
;-)
I would really feel wrong moving forward while Pete is not here. I can
hold off until he comes back on Monday ;)
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
8:12 p.m.
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Shane Bryzak <sbryzak(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Pete explicitly stated that he wanted to try it out first. And
there's
not really a rush on this, we can migrate the repository at any time and
it's not like svn is holding us up from getting anything done.
So I'm saying something different. I'm saying that there is a rush (not
before Monday, but certainly next week). People want to get started and if
we set them all up on SVN, then it makes it doubly hard to change because we
have to tell everyone to change from SVN to Git. No one has checked out
anything yet (well, maybe some, but they are the survivors), so we should do
this before we blast out instructions for how to get started.
There is simply no better time than the present (I'm am really starting to
feel bad that this discussion had to happen while Pete was away).
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
9:10 p.m.
From a stand point of a contributor-to-be, right now the most pressing
thing
is to get everything to compile and for me to get familiar with whatever
code was already ported over. That can take a week or a couple. For that we
would need (at least at the very moment) to have the seam-parent project
checked into SVN. I got the pom.xml that Dan recovered, so I am good to go
for the next few days. In the meantime, we can wait for Pete and then
discuss options for hosting of the code and other things.
9:17 p.m.
You could have a look at the Weld code also, being the Seam core and
all it could be worth browsing to the code in order to get familiar
with it.
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 10:10 PM, Piotr Steininger
<piotr.steininger(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>From a stand point of a contributor-to-be, right now the most
pressing
thing is to get everything to compile and for me to get familiar with
whatever code was already ported over. That can take a week or a couple. For
that we would need (at least at the very moment) to have the seam-parent
project checked into SVN. I got the pom.xml that Dan recovered, so I am good
to go for the next few days. In the meantime, we can wait for Pete and then
discuss options for hosting of the code and other things.
_______________________________________________
seam-dev mailing list
seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
--
---
Nik
9:41 p.m.
I should have clarified, I attempted to check in the pom.xml, but I got
permission denied. I have no idea why atm.
- Dan Allen
Sent from my Android-powered phone:
An open platform for carriers, consumers
and developers.
On Dec 11, 2009 3:10 PM, "Piotr Steininger" <piotr.steininger(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
From a stand point of a contributor-to-be, right now the most pressing
thing
is to get everything to compile and for me to get familiar with whatever
code was already ported over. That can take a week or a couple. For that we
would need (at least at the very moment) to have the seam-parent project
checked into SVN. I got the pom.xml that Dan recovered, so I am good to go
for the next few days. In the meantime, we can wait for Pete and then
discuss options for hosting of the code and other things.
2:28 p.m.
Our SVN got screwed up with some IT problem.
Regarding moving to GIT, management raised some concerns about this, I am working with
them on it and will set a deadline for them of the end of this week.
On 11 Dec 2009, at 20:41, Dan Allen wrote:
I should have clarified, I attempted to check in the pom.xml, but I
got permission denied. I have no idea why atm.
- Dan Allen
Sent from my Android-powered phone:
An open platform for carriers, consumers
and developers.
> On Dec 11, 2009 3:10 PM, "Piotr Steininger"
<piotr.steininger(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From a stand point of a contributor-to-be, right now the most pressing thing is to
get everything to compile and for me to get familiar with whatever code was already ported
over. That can take a week or a couple. For that we would need (at least at the very
moment) to have the seam-parent project checked into SVN. I got the pom.xml that Dan
recovered, so I am good to go for the next few days. In the meantime, we can wait for Pete
and then discuss options for hosting of the code and other things.
_______________________________________________
seam-dev mailing list
seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
2:31 p.m.
Regarding the build - my apologies, I got half way through the changes, and ran out of
time.
Dan, do you want to take over here? We should chat about this real-time, perhaps today?
On 14 Dec 2009, at 13:28, Pete Muir wrote:
Our SVN got screwed up with some IT problem.
Regarding moving to GIT, management raised some concerns about this, I am working with
them on it and will set a deadline for them of the end of this week.
On 11 Dec 2009, at 20:41, Dan Allen wrote:
> I should have clarified, I attempted to check in the pom.xml, but I got permission
denied. I have no idea why atm.
>
> - Dan Allen
>
> Sent from my Android-powered phone:
> An open platform for carriers, consumers
> and developers.
>
>
>> On Dec 11, 2009 3:10 PM, "Piotr Steininger"
<piotr.steininger(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> From a stand point of a contributor-to-be, right now the most pressing thing is
to get everything to compile and for me to get familiar with whatever code was already
ported over. That can take a week or a couple. For that we would need (at least at the
very moment) to have the seam-parent project checked into SVN. I got the pom.xml that Dan
recovered, so I am good to go for the next few days. In the meantime, we can wait for Pete
and then discuss options for hosting of the code and other things.
>
> _______________________________________________
> seam-dev mailing list
> seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
_______________________________________________
seam-dev mailing list
seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
7:59 p.m.
I was waiting to see if there was a chance jboss.org would provide Git soon. There
isn't.
We can therefore do the migration to github.
Only outstanding issue is connecting commits into JIRA - is this something people use a
lot?
On 11 Dec 2009, at 17:04, Dan Allen wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Shane Bryzak
<sbryzak(a)redhat.com> wrote:
The plan is to probably move to github, although we are going to do some (prudent)
evaluation first.
We'll of course wait for Pete to return on Monday because we can't decide
anything without him, and likely he makes the final call anyway. But I still vote that we
just go for it. We have gotten tons of feedback about github and while there have been
great arguments for Mercurial, I think we can all agree that both are better than SVN and
github is well run. If worse comes to worse, we can make another move, but all signs just
point to doing it.
So let's hang until Monday, see what Pete says, but if need be, we can do a vote on
the list and just bite the bullet.
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
_______________________________________________
seam-dev mailing list
seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
8:03 p.m.
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com> wrote:
I was waiting to see if there was a chance jboss.org would provide
Git
soon. There isn't.
We can therefore do the migration to github.
Yeah!
Only outstanding issue is connecting commits into JIRA - is this something
people use a lot?
I don't. I prefer to use the Eclipse integration to show me recent updates.
What's important is that the commit include the issue number (if relevant).
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
11:24 p.m.
On 15/12/09 04:59, Pete Muir wrote:
I was waiting to see if there was a chance jboss.org would provide
Git soon. There isn't.
We can therefore do the migration to github.
Only outstanding issue is connecting commits into JIRA - is this something people use a
lot?
It seems that github has commit postbacks which we can possibly use to
connect issues together. The other thing I'm not clear about is
repository security - it was our intention to give module committers
access to their own module (and nothing else). I can't see anything on
github that gives us the fine grained security control that SVN
currently does. Of course maybe I just don't know enough about git yet
and security works in a totally different way...
On 11 Dec 2009, at 17:04, Dan Allen wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Shane Bryzak<sbryzak(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> The plan is to probably move to github, although we are going to do some (prudent)
evaluation first.
>
> We'll of course wait for Pete to return on Monday because we can't decide
anything without him, and likely he makes the final call anyway. But I still vote that we
just go for it. We have gotten tons of feedback about github and while there have been
great arguments for Mercurial, I think we can all agree that both are better than SVN and
github is well run. If worse comes to worse, we can make another move, but all signs just
point to doing it.
>
> So let's hang until Monday, see what Pete says, but if need be, we can do a vote
on the list and just bite the bullet.
>
> -Dan
>
> --
> Dan Allen
> Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
> Registered Linux User #231597
>
> http://mojavelinux.com
> http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
> http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
> _______________________________________________
> seam-dev mailing list
> seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
>
11:57 p.m.
git per se has no security at all. Git uses the security of the underlying
transfer/storage layers.
Btw: you should rethink your modules/modularity because git treats a repo always as a
whole. Means no spatial checkouts, a tag is always over the whole repo, etc.
There is a mechanism called git submodule [1] but that is a bit clumsy still.
Git is _really_ fine, but certainly needs a bit of a different mindset than SVN!
LieGrue,
strub
[1] http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git-core/docs/git-submodule.html
--- Shane Bryzak <sbryzak(a)redhat.com> schrieb am Mo, 14.12.2009:
Von: Shane Bryzak <sbryzak(a)redhat.com>
Betreff: Re: [seam-dev] Modules have been moved
An: "Pete Muir" <pmuir(a)redhat.com>
CC: seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
Datum: Montag, 14. Dezember 2009, 23:24
On 15/12/09 04:59, Pete Muir wrote:
> I was waiting to see if there was a chance jboss.org
would provide Git soon. There isn't.
>
> We can therefore do the migration to github.
>
> Only outstanding issue is connecting commits into JIRA
- is this something people use a lot?
>
It seems that github has commit postbacks which we can
possibly use to
connect issues together. The other thing I'm not
clear about is
repository security - it was our intention to give module
committers
access to their own module (and nothing else). I
can't see anything on
github that gives us the fine grained security control that
SVN
currently does. Of course maybe I just don't know
enough about git yet
and security works in a totally different way...
> On 11 Dec 2009, at 17:04, Dan Allen wrote:
>
>
>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Shane
Bryzak<sbryzak(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>> The plan is to probably move to github, although
we are going to do some (prudent) evaluation first.
>>
>> We'll of course wait for Pete to return on Monday
because we can't decide anything without him, and likely he
makes the final call anyway. But I still vote that we just
go for it. We have gotten tons of feedback about github and
while there have been great arguments for Mercurial, I think
we can all agree that both are better than SVN and github is
well run. If worse comes to worse, we can make another move,
but all signs just point to doing it.
>>
>> So let's hang until Monday, see what Pete says,
but if need be, we can do a vote on the list and just bite
the bullet.
>>
>> -Dan
>>
>> --
>> Dan Allen
>> Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam
in Action
>> Registered Linux User #231597
>>
>> http://mojavelinux.com
>> http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
>> http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
>> _______________________________________________
>> seam-dev mailing list
>> seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
>>
>
_______________________________________________
seam-dev mailing list
seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz gegen
Massenmails.
http://mail.yahoo.com
11:47 a.m.
On 14 Dec 2009, at 22:57, Mark Struberg wrote:
git per se has no security at all. Git uses the security of the
underlying transfer/storage layers.
Btw: you should rethink your modules/modularity because git treats a repo always as a
whole.
I don't think this is entirely necessary ;-) All that happens is that a sandbox is a
clone of the tree which different people control.
Means no spatial checkouts, a tag is always over the whole repo,
etc.
There is a mechanism called git submodule [1] but that is a bit clumsy still.
Git is _really_ fine, but certainly needs a bit of a different mindset than SVN!
LieGrue,
strub
[1] http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git-core/docs/git-submodule.html
--- Shane Bryzak <sbryzak(a)redhat.com> schrieb am Mo, 14.12.2009:
> Von: Shane Bryzak <sbryzak(a)redhat.com>
> Betreff: Re: [seam-dev] Modules have been moved
> An: "Pete Muir" <pmuir(a)redhat.com>
> CC: seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> Datum: Montag, 14. Dezember 2009, 23:24
> On 15/12/09 04:59, Pete Muir wrote:
>> I was waiting to see if there was a chance jboss.org
> would provide Git soon. There isn't.
>>
>> We can therefore do the migration to github.
>>
>> Only outstanding issue is connecting commits into JIRA
> - is this something people use a lot?
>>
>
> It seems that github has commit postbacks which we can
> possibly use to
> connect issues together. The other thing I'm not
> clear about is
> repository security - it was our intention to give module
> committers
> access to their own module (and nothing else). I
> can't see anything on
> github that gives us the fine grained security control that
> SVN
> currently does. Of course maybe I just don't know
> enough about git yet
> and security works in a totally different way...
>> On 11 Dec 2009, at 17:04, Dan Allen wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Shane
> Bryzak<sbryzak(a)redhat.com>
> wrote:
>>> The plan is to probably move to github, although
> we are going to do some (prudent) evaluation first.
>>>
>>> We'll of course wait for Pete to return on Monday
> because we can't decide anything without him, and likely he
> makes the final call anyway. But I still vote that we just
> go for it. We have gotten tons of feedback about github and
> while there have been great arguments for Mercurial, I think
> we can all agree that both are better than SVN and github is
> well run. If worse comes to worse, we can make another move,
> but all signs just point to doing it.
>>>
>>> So let's hang until Monday, see what Pete says,
> but if need be, we can do a vote on the list and just bite
> the bullet.
>>>
>>> -Dan
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dan Allen
>>> Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam
> in Action
>>> Registered Linux User #231597
>>>
>>> http://mojavelinux.com
>>> http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
>>> http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> seam-dev mailing list
>>> seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> seam-dev mailing list
> seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz gegen
Massenmails.
http://mail.yahoo.com
11:45 a.m.
Sorry all, apparently I got the wrong message re hosting at jboss.org. I have a con call
tomorrow with our IT guys to see what is the real story.
Will keep you updated :-)
On 14 Dec 2009, at 18:59, Pete Muir wrote:
I was waiting to see if there was a chance jboss.org would provide
Git soon. There isn't.
We can therefore do the migration to github.
Only outstanding issue is connecting commits into JIRA - is this something people use a
lot?
On 11 Dec 2009, at 17:04, Dan Allen wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Shane Bryzak <sbryzak(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> The plan is to probably move to github, although we are going to do some (prudent)
evaluation first.
>
> We'll of course wait for Pete to return on Monday because we can't decide
anything without him, and likely he makes the final call anyway. But I still vote that we
just go for it. We have gotten tons of feedback about github and while there have been
great arguments for Mercurial, I think we can all agree that both are better than SVN and
github is well run. If worse comes to worse, we can make another move, but all signs just
point to doing it.
>
> So let's hang until Monday, see what Pete says, but if need be, we can do a vote
on the list and just bite the bullet.
>
> -Dan
>
> --
> Dan Allen
> Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
> Registered Linux User #231597
>
> http://mojavelinux.com
> http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
> http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
> _______________________________________________
> seam-dev mailing list
> seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
_______________________________________________
seam-dev mailing list
seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
7:53 p.m.
On Dec 11, 2009, at 10:53 AM, Shane Bryzak wrote:
The plan is to probably move to github, although we are going to do
some (prudent) evaluation first.
It's just one datapoint, but I've been a customer of github for about a year and a
half. I've been really happy with their service. And, of course, with git it's
trivial to move to a new repository if for some reason we aren't happy with something.
5239
days inactive
5248
days old
30 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
Dan Allen -
Mark Struberg -
Nicklas Karlsson -
Norman Richards -
Pete Muir -
Piotr Steininger -
psteininger
-
Shane Bryzak