3:54 a.m.
On 30/07/12 17:18, Boleslaw Dawidowicz wrote:
Hmm… What is the benefit over just starting working on 2.x in current
picketlink-idm master and leave previous branches? I think you still
have two issues:
- A lot of artefacts released to maven repo. You will need to define
different artefact names to avoid collisions but then it will still be
very difficult to avoid confusion. People already have a problem with
understanding that "PicketLink" is an umbrella project and very often
refer to either "PicketLink Federation" or "PicketLink IDM" as just
"PicketLink. If they now find both
"org.picketlink.idm:picketlink-idm-api" and "org.picketlink.idm:api:
or org:picketlink.idm:api jars with same version it will create
confusion. Then if we start from 2.x version - I'm not sure what does
it bring to rename old repo to legacy in such scenario. you just get
rid of few old branches and tags. Btw. I branched what need to be
branched so picketlink-idm master is ready to be nuked.
I'm happy to do it that way, my only concern was that there will be
major API breakage between the two versions hence the separation. If the
current picketlink-idm is already branched and there's no problem nuking
master, then we can place the new project in the same repo.
- You would need to do the same with JIRA or you need to deal with
same problem. Because PicketLink IDM was only really consumed by
GateIn JIRA is a bit left behind - so quite easy to cleanup.
Good point, I hadn't considered JIRA.
Could you write more how would you deal with those as part of repo
renaming?
Btw. I'm still holding the official "PicketLink IDM Component Lead".
Because of my GateIn/EPP duties I don't think I will be able to spent
as much time as Shane on development - even though me and Marek
Posolda will try to help as much as possible. Therefore I think it may
be better for Shane to take over the official title as this will be
reflecting current reality anyway - no issue on my side :) I just need
to keep control of existing 1.x branches of PicketLink IDM as this is
what we still rely on in GateIn Portal and what we ship in EPP.
Bolek
On Jul 30, 2012, at 4:32 AM, Shane Bryzak <sbryzak(a)redhat.com
<mailto:sbryzak@redhat.com>> wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I'm just looking at the infrastructure we have for doing this,
> currently in the PicketLink github repo [1] we have picketlink-idm
> and cdi repositories set up. I propose that we rename picketlink-idm
> to picketlink-idm-legacy to make way for the new picketlink-idm, and
> rename cdi to picketlink-cdi (this module will then contain all the
> CDI and DeltaSpike integration for PicketLink IDM, plus some
> authorization features such as ACLs and permission management). Are
> there any objections to this?
>
> Shane
>
> [1] https://github.com/picketlink
> _______________________________________________
> security-dev mailing list
> security-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:security-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/security-dev