RE: [Clirr-devel] [Patch] minor improvements
Status: Alpha
Brought to you by:
lkuehne
Menu
▾
▴
RE: [Clirr-devel] [Patch] minor improvements
|
From: Vincent M. <vm...@pi...> - 2004-05-27 16:08:31
|
> -----Original Message----- > From: cli...@li... [mailto:clirr-devel- > ad...@li...] On Behalf Of Lars K=FChne > Sent: 27 May 2004 18:04 > To: cli...@li... > Subject: Re: [Clirr-devel] [Patch] minor improvements >=20 > Vincent, >=20 > clirr > + framework > + integration > + Ant > + Maven > + Eclipse You mean: clirr + framework + integration ++ Ant ++ Maven ++ Eclipse right? >=20 > looks good. Could you create that project structure locally (with only > Ant or Maven under the integration folder) and send me a zip file? I'd > like to have a look at it "live", play with it a bit and get comfortable > with multiproject builds before we take it to CVS... I'll see if I find the time. -Vincent >=20 > Thanks, > Lars >=20 >=20 > Vincent Massol wrote: >=20 > > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: cli...@li... [mailto:clirr-devel- > >>ad...@li...] On Behalf Of Lars K=FChne > >>Sent: 26 May 2004 06:21 > >>Cc: cli...@li... > >>Subject: Re: [Clirr-devel] [Patch] minor improvements > >> > >>Vincent Massol wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>>[...] > >>> > >>>BTW, I'm trying to find some time to write the Maven plugin for clirr > >>>(it's really simple to do - I probably need about 2-3 hours end to > >>> > >>> > >end). > > > > > >>> > >>> > >>Great. > >> > >> > >> > >>>Are you still happy if I commit it to the clirr CVS? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>Sure. From a user perspective it's much better to do find everything > >> > >> > >in > > > > > >>one place, clirr.sf.net. > >> > >> > >> > >>>If so, before being able to commit it, we need to restructure the CVS > >>>directory structure. Here's what I propose: > >>> > >>>clirr > >>> |_ framework > >>> |_ [move everything that is currently in clirr/] > >>> |_ maven > >>> > >>>I'll also provide the top level maven.xml that builds the whole > >>> > >>> > >thing. > > > > > >>>What do you think? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>In principle I'm positive, but I've never worked with Maven reactor > >>builds (in fact Clirr is the only project where I'm using Maven at > >> > >> > >all), > > > > > >>so I have a few questions... > >> > >> > > > >In maven you no longer use the reactor. There's a plugin called > >multiproject that handles multiprojects. > > > >For example if you wish to call the "dist" target for all (sub)projects: > > > >maven -Dgoal=3Ddist multiproject:goal > > > >Of course, we could (and should) have a top level maven.xml file with: > > > ><goal name=3D"dist"> > > <j:set var=3D"goal" value=3D"dist"/> > > <attainGoal name=3D"multiproject:goal"/> > ></goal> > > > >so that users can simply type "maven dist" at the top level to build all > >subprojects. > > > >Note: each subproject needs of course to perform an installation to the > >local repo (jar:install for example) so that their artifacts are > >available to the other subprojects through a dependency (which btw > >allows Maven to build all projects in the correct order). > > > > > > > >>Would it also be possible to add the Maven plugin in a new CVS module, > >>i.e. have mavenplugin alongside CVSROOT and clirr? What are the > >>pros/cons here? > >> > >> > > > >It's possible of course, but... > > > >Pros: > >- I don't see any pros... ;-) > > > >Cons: > >- We won't have a nice integrated build. People will be checkout only > >one module and not the other, thus making it difficult to have an > >integrated build. > >- For example the maven plugin with its tests won't be able to serve as > >functional testing of the clirr framework. > > > > > > > >>In the future I might want to add IDE plugins as well (e.g. an Eclipse > >>plugin that tells you that you broke the API while you're typing). > >> > >> > >Would > > > > > >>it be possible to add such plugins within the structure you're > >> > >> > >proposing? > > > >Sure! > > > >In that case I suggest: > > > >clirr > > |_ framework > > |_ integration > > |_ maven > > |_ eclipse > > > > > > > >>Would it be possible / make sense to split up the current content into > >>"framework" and "anttask"? After a split, is it possible to distribute > >>framework and anttask in one combined jar (like it is now), so the > >>classpath setup in Ant builds remains manageable? > >> > >> > > > >I was also thinking about this the other day. It's possible to have: > > > >clirr > > |_ framework > > |_ integration > > |_ ant > > |_ maven > > |_ eclipse > > > >I'm all for it. > > > >We could combine the framework + integration/ant jars by using a custom > >goal in our maven.xml: > > > ><zip [...] clirr.jar> > > <zipfileset [...] clirr-framework.jar/> > > <zipfileset [...] clirr-ant.jar/> > ></zip> > > > >There's a plugin called uberjar that we could possibly use but I'm not > >sure it's exactly for this. > > > > > > > >>How would the website be organized? We have some toplevel content, > >> > >> > >plus > > > > > >>some content for the individual subprojects (framework, Ant task, > >> > >> > >Maven > > > > > >>plugin, Eclipse plugin, ...) - where would the xdocs of each one > >> > >> > >appear, > > > > > >>and what would be the structure of the resulting website? > >> > >> > > > >The multiproject:site goals can do some site aggregation. It means our > >website would have the following kind of menu: > > > >[rest is same as now] > > > >Integrations > > Ant > > Maven > > Eclipse > > > >[rest is same as now] > > > >When clicking on Ant/Maven/Eclipse, it will go to the site for that > >project. > > > > > > > >>Would the reactor builds enforce a combined build of everything to > >> > >> > >make > > > > > >>a release? For example, if nothing changes in framework and you > >> > >> > >improve > > > > > >>the Maven plugin, would it be necessary to create a new, unchanged, > >>release of framework just to make the Maven plugin publically > >> > >> > >available? > > > >No. It's our choice. > > > > > > > >>>>BTW, I'm using Maven 1.0 RC1 and the "nonsense link" is still there > >>>> > >>>> > >- > > > > > >>>>guess it's time to upgrade... Will Maven 1.0 final be released > >>>> > >>>> > >shortly > > > > > >>>>or does it make sense to install RC3 now? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>Hmmm.... I didn't see any link but maybe I was not looking at the > >>> > >>> > >right > > > > > >>>place. Could you explain where you see this link? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>On http://clirr.sourceforge.net/ the navigation menu on the left > >>contains a link "Development Process" that now points to the Clirr > >>homepage. I had expected it to be removed when I cleared the property. > >> > >>The original link to the Maven site does not quite fit with Clirr: The > >>Maven site documents the release process of Turbine ("for the 2.X > >>development path..."), talks about writing SQL "alter table" scripts > >> > >> > >for > > > > > >>compatibility, documents what to do when modifying Maven plugins, > >> > >> > >etc.). > > > >ok. I can confirm that it's not there anymore with Maven rc3. > > > >[snip] > > > >Thanks > >-Vincent > > > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------- > >This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g > >Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. > >Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. > >http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id149&alloc_id=8166&op=3Dclick > >_______________________________________________ > >Clirr-devel mailing list > >Cli...@li... > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/clirr-devel > > > > > > >=20 >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g > Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. > Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D3149&alloc_id=3D8166&op=3Dclick > _______________________________________________ > Clirr-devel mailing list > Cli...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/clirr-devel |
