Re: cvs commit: jakarta-gump/project jakarta-ant.xml jakarta-commons.xml jakarta-taglibs.xml uddi4j.xml xml-crimson.xml xml-xerces.xml

Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> 
>> well, no (and it's not to be taken as a proposal ;). But it is the 
>> easiest thing that could possibly work (in that I could probably set 
>> it up). I'm totally supportive for real solutions, but I'm okay with 
>> hacky solutions until those real solutions arrive (to paraphrase Berin 
>> "waiting until the next release of [the maven and centipede] projects").
> 
> Yes, I agree too. I was thinking about the conceptual idea of having 
> descriptors for Centipede projects in Gump CVS, and how this would make 
> things difficult for Centipede projects.

Suggestion: let's just note that it is very easy to move descriptors.

For ASF projects which are not (yet) centipede based, the path of least 
resistance seems to be to put them in the gump cvs repository.

Given the current implementation of Centipede, the path of least 
resistance for projects which are currently and actively using centipede 
is to put such project descriptors in the project cvs.

Moving project descriptors in anticipation of future use seems 
counter-productive at this time.

Future versions of gump or centipede (or centigump or gumpipede or 
whatever) may change these observations.

Finally, despite these observations, people are free to put their 
descriptors in any accessible location as long as they are willing to 
actively maintain them.

Peace?

- Sam Ruby