Project

General

Profile

Actions
Copy link

Architecture #2097

closed

Remove cf-clerk parent, only keep cf-clerk core

Added by François ARMAND about 13 years ago. Updated almost 13 years ago.

Status:
Released
Priority:
3
Assignee:
François ARMAND
Category:
Architecture - Code maintenance
Target version:
2.4.0~alpha4
Pull Request:
Effort required:
Name check:
Fix check:
Regression:

Description

Historically, cf-clerk was a meta-project with several subprojects. It has been a long time since it is no more the case, so we should simplify the project layout and remove cf-clerck-parent, keeping only cf-clerck-core, which would be renamed into just "cf-clerk".

To sum up, we would go from:

cf-clerk
|-- cfclerk-core
|     |-- pom.xml
|     `-- src
|-- LICENSE
|-- LICENSE_EXCEPTION
|-- pom.xml
`-- README.asciidoc

To:

cf-clerk
|-- LICENSE
|-- LICENSE_EXCEPTION
|-- pom.xml
|-- README.asciidoc
`-- src

Actions
Copy link
 #1

Updated by François ARMAND about 13 years ago

  • Description updated (diff)
Actions
Copy link
 #2

Updated by François ARMAND about 13 years ago

  • Description updated (diff)
Actions
Copy link
 #3

Updated by Jonathan CLARKE almost 13 years ago

  • Assignee set to François ARMAND
  • Target version changed from 2.4.0~alpha2 to 2.4.0~alpha3

Sounds like a sane idea to me, but it's getting late in the release cycle for this kind of change, isn't it? Unless it's quick and easy and pretty much without impact, I feel we should do this for 2.5. What are your thoughts?

Actions
Copy link
 #4

Updated by Jonathan CLARKE almost 13 years ago

  • Target version changed from 2.4.0~alpha3 to 2.4.0~alpha4
Actions
Copy link
 #5

Updated by François ARMAND almost 13 years ago

  • Status changed from Discussion to Pending technical review
  • % Done changed from 0 to 100
Actions
Copy link
 #6

Updated by Nicolas CHARLES almost 13 years ago

  • Status changed from Pending technical review to 10

This looks ok, thank you francois

Actions
Copy link
 #7

Updated by Jonathan CLARKE almost 13 years ago

  • Status changed from 10 to Released

Closing these "Architecture" issues without a functional review - this step of the workflow has no sense here, there is no functional impact on code architecture changes (or there shouldn't be anyway!).

I think we should remove this step from the workflow for Architecture issues.

Actions
Copy link

Also available in: Atom PDF