Modularization of plugins
John Sanda
jsanda at redhat.com
Fri May 13 04:52:04 UTC 2011
Actually, I think a stronger argument can be made that it is less
practical not to put plugins into a separate repo. RHQ is a really big
project, and building it take a considerable amount of time even with a
hefty multi-core machine that has lots of RAM. There is a very clear
separation between plugins and other parts of RHQ; so, the initial
effort would not be very involved. There are some things to consider
though. Plugins could be released on a separate schedule which brings
version compatibility into the fold. This would result in additional
maintenance, but I think the pros far outweigh the cons. I think a
separate release schedule for plugins is/could be a good thing. I also
think it could help spur community involvement. We might consider a
plugins sandbox for things that are more experimental. Plugins could be
promoted from the sandbox into the main plugins repo. I think that this
model has worked really well with Apache Commons.
- John
On 5/12/11 9:07 PM, Elias Ross wrote:
> I was thinking, it'd be nicer if the standard plugins were all located
> in a separate git repositories. It would make it easier to git clone,
> and later extend/improve each of them without having the concern of
> tracking the main project.
>
> Of course, they are so many, it's not likely practical. Perhaps just
> the plugins in one repository by itself?
>
> You end up in a situation where you must first master doing the
> complete build (which I haven't!) to contribute to one part of it. I
> keep getting hung on GWT for some reason.
> _______________________________________________
> rhq-devel mailing list
> rhq-devel at lists.fedorahosted.org
> https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/rhq-devel
More information about the rhq-devel
mailing list