Hello Amey.
On Thu, 30 Nov 2017 23:45:45 +0530, Amey Jadiye wrote:
Pardon me for pulling this thread up again, I havent read anything
about
"Commons Geometry" since long
Thanks for your renewed interest.
(or may be I missed any other disscussion? ).
Probably not.
is someone working on this ?
It would be a surprise.
what is the final decision ?
There hasn't been any progress towards a decision.
There isn't even a consensus on one of the central tenets of
Apache ("Those who do the work..."): how sad/strange (?).
I'm having good
amount of time to spend on this now, appreciate If someone direct me
to
correct disscussion thread
IIRC, the one below is where we left off...
I think I can help here.
Thanks for the offer!
It took me half hour to read all old mails but dont see final
verdict,
though I was in favour with Maven modules but after reading all again
I
think Gilles approch is more practicle here and If no one is working
I can
submit something to review.
IMHO, the priority would be to review the status of "Numbers"
(i.e. what is preventing a first release?).
Best regards,
Gilles
Regards,
Amey
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 4:44 AM, Gilles
<gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>
wrote:
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 13:07:24 +0200, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 12:50 AM, Gilles
<gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>
wrote:
Because of "Commons" rules, it is not "equivalent": There was
a long thread concluding that all modules must be released
_together_, and with the same top-level package name and version
number.
It is very "maintainer(s)-unfriendly" because of the quite
different subject matters that coexist in CM.
I wouldn't count that rule "*all* modules must be released" as a
mantra:
I found the idea attractive, but Stian (link to older discussion
in a previous post) advised that maven would not easily "support"
it.
Has that changed since the discussion took place (10 months ago)?
a) In case of an emergency release (fixing a CVE, for example), I'd
clearly consider pushing out the module as more important than
waiting
for a full release. (Of course, one must be careful to maintain
compatibility when pushing out just a module, but that goes without
saying.)
b) I'd like to hear others experiences on that topic (maybe VFS).
Anyways, my personal experiences with Rat are clear: Releasing
*all*
together is causing nothing but pain, and tends to defer releases
indefinitely. OTOH, releasing a submodule can be done at all times,
and without overly much preparation.
In conclusion, I'd definitely support the release of a single
submodule, if the need would arise.
How can one reconcile what you say here with what was said in
that old thread?
Would the PMC accept that a component contains independent modules
(where "independent" means that each module can have its own version
number, irrespective of the component's version)?
Arguably (cf. thread referred to above), a "Commons" component
should be simple enough that multiple versions are not necessary.
[Chorus:] This is not the case with "Commons Math", hence separate
components for independent contents (such as "Geometry", "RNG",
"Numbers" and "SigProc") is the simplest solution.
Gilles
Jochen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
