[jbosstools-dev] Fwd: Proposed New Github Component Chunks for JBoss Tools 4.0

[Max Rydahl Andersen]

moving to jbosstools-dev

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Nick Boldt <nboldt at redhat.com>
> Subject: Proposed New Github Component Chunks for JBoss Tools 4.0
> Date: 23 Aug 2012 21:00:37 GMT+02:00
> To: Max Rydahl Andersen <max.andersen at redhat.com>, Denis Golovin <dgolovin at exadel.com>, Michael Istria <mistria at redhat.com>,
> 
> 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.
> 
> == TIER 0: no upstream JBoss.org chunks ==
> 
> Base = tests + common + usage
> 
> == 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
> 
> == TIER 2: 4 upstream chunks ==
> 
> Seam/Runtime = Seam + Runtime
>  -> depends on Hib + Vis + AppServer + Base
> 
> == TIER 3: 5 upstream chunks ==
> 
> Central/Examples/Maven/Portlet = central + examples + maven + portlet
>  -> depends on Seam/Runtime + Hib + Vis + AppServer + Base
> 
> 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_Release_Candidates - "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."
> 
> If you have comments or suggestions regarding this migration plan, please post them here or in https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBIDE-12475.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> -- 
> Nick Boldt :: JBoss by Red Hat
> Productization Lead :: JBoss Tools & Dev Studio
> http://nick.divbyzero.com
>