| Re: [starter-dev] Project structure change proposal voting |
| My vote is: 0 I agree with all of Ivar’s reasons, but I may feel a bit more strongly about them. I have been maintaining multiple archetypes for a couple of years now (https://ivonet.github.io/archetype/) and have had no maintenance problems at all. Note that we are talking about an archetype and not duplication of a code base even though it may seem that way. Every time we create a new archetype we are actually creating a new template to be maintained. from that point onwards there is no connection to other archetypes anymore as they have their own lifecycle due to reasons like runtime / Jakarta version etc. Jakarta EE version(s) that are deprecated are still there but do not need maintenance anymore and one can just stop maintaining them without any code change or if statement. Testing a single purpose archetype is trivial. I fear that having all versions in one archetype is just asking for trouble and not even on the long run. Soo many dependencies to take into account and so many extra flows to test. I have worked for years on these kinds of projects and I have even taken the time to create my own archetypes because they are so useful. IMHO it is a shame to discard senior developers and we should not make thqt distinction. Starter projects should be for everybody equally and should serve all purposes. The approach Ivar and I started with the UI currently on the site allows for other developers to add their archetypes easily which could make adoption fun and could create a community if we promote that at conferences. I think working on a single archetype will limit participation to those few already working on it and not stimulate participation at all. At least that is how I feel. I also agree with Emily Jiang that we should see if we can get metrics and our opinions should reflect what comes out of that. I would vote for the double approach for now and get these statistics. Other that that I am strongly of the opinion that real demo code should not be in an archetype but in tutorials. Ivo.
|