[seam-dev] Seam 2.1 branch

[Shane Bryzak]

Dan Allen wrote:
>
>
>     Should we qualify the term modules? Meaning instead of modules and
>     sandbox we have something like
>
>     modules
>     sandbox-modules
>     thirdparty-modules
>
>     Modules (I'm open to a qualifier like official-modules) would be
>     official modules in Seam...stuff that is going into EAP. sandbox
>     would be modules we want to put into core, but they just aren't
>     ready yet or may never be. thirdparty would be modules we are
>     hosting for a community member but we don't want to maintain. For
>     instance, perhaps the host the tapastry integration module or
>     whatever. I'd be interested in doing that with examples too.
>
>     examples
>     sandbox-examples
>     thirdparty-examples
>
>     Thoughts? This should be easy to add without affecting what you
>     have setup already.
>
>
> Any thoughts on this yet?

I don't think it's necessary to split up the modules into 
official/unofficial - the modules that are included in EAP are up to the 
productization team, and IMHO something we shouldn't care about in the 
community version.  Sandbox is exactly as you described it.  I also 
don't see a need for differentiation between thirdparty and "in house" 
modules - we already have lots of Seam features that are maintained by 
community members.  If we make the judgment that something is 
polished/stable enough to leave the sandbox, then it just becomes a 
module like everything else.  We can easily give the community member 
SVN commit access for their own module.
>
> -Dan
>
> -- 
> Dan Allen
> Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
>
> http://mojavelinux.com
> http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
> http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Dan
>
> NOTE: While I make a strong effort to keep up with my email on a daily
> basis, personal or other work matters can sometimes keep me away
> from my email. If you contact me, but don't hear back for more than a 
> week,
> it is very likely that I am excessively backlogged or the message was
> caught in the spam filters.  Please don't hesitate to resend a message if
> you feel that it did not reach my attention.