maven-plugins-developer

[Maven-plugins-developer] maven package plugin

[<try...@st...>]

Hi

As suggested by Andy on irc, I would like to propose a new 'package'
plugin for creating deb and rpm packages. It should also support the
creating of package repositories for apt and the likes.

I've rambeled up a suggestion at my wiki:

http://wiki.nostdal.net/Articles_2fMaven_2fPackagePlugin

I would like some feedback on the suggestion either by comments on the
list or just change the wiki page.

The page actually discuss two things, the maven-package-plugin and a
suggestion for common goal naming of the package plugins.

As always, I'm online on #maven at irc.werken.com

Trygvis

Re: [Maven-plugins-developer] maven package plugin

[Andy J. <an...@aj...>]

On Thursday 25 Sep 2003 15:10, Trygve Laugst=F8l wrote:
> As suggested by Andy on irc, I would like to propose a new 'package'
> plugin for creating deb and rpm packages. It should also support the
> creating of package repositories for apt and the likes.
>
> I've rambeled up a suggestion at my wiki:
>
> http://wiki.nostdal.net/Articles_2fMaven_2fPackagePlugin
>
> I would like some feedback on the suggestion either by comments on the
> list or just change the wiki page.


Its a shame that Maven plugins do not support the idea of subclassing :-) W=
hat=20
then would be perfect would be to have the "package" plugin and then derive=
=20
RPM, Deb, etc from that so hence we have the same goals and properties and=
=20
just add on specific things for particular output formats. Oh well ...

I'm not sure of how well Maven plugins support the idea of *using* a differ=
ent=20
plugin ... kind of like a sub-plugin ... with this we could have a package=
=20
plugin that gives a lot of the logic for packaging systems, and then we hav=
e=20
RPM, Deb plugins that use this package plugin.

I think the idea of having a common interface is definitely the way to go .=
=2E.=20
since the input is basically the same, and the output is a file. Obviously=
=20
there are other formats of "package" ... e.g tgz, zip. What I'm not convinc=
ed=20
about is whether to have these as a single plugin (and have logic internall=
y=20
that checks on the output type and does things accordingly), or whether to=
=20
have separate plugins with the same goals and properties.

I think i'd tend towards having separate plugins solely because there are=20
projects where you want to output multiple package formats ... so I could=20
output a Deb, RPM, and TGZ. If I had these as a single plugin I would have =
to=20
edit my project.properties and then run the plugin, and edit it again and r=
un=20
it ... whereas if i have separate plugins I would just do "maven rpm", "mav=
en=20
deb", "maven tgz" etc. Having separate plugins does give us the problem of=
=20
maintaining consistency in goal and property naming - adopting your "create=
",=20
"create-snapshot", and "copy-resources" in Deb and RPM for now makes a lot =
of=20
sense.






=2D-=20
Andy

Re: [Maven-plugins-developer] maven package plugin

[<try...@st...>]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003, Andy Jefferson wrote:

> On Thursday 25 Sep 2003 15:10, Trygve Laugst=F8l wrote:
> > As suggested by Andy on irc, I would like to propose a new 'package'
> > plugin for creating deb and rpm packages. It should also support the
> > creating of package repositories for apt and the likes.
> >
> > I've rambeled up a suggestion at my wiki:
> >
> > http://wiki.nostdal.net/Articles_2fMaven_2fPackagePlugin
> >
> > I would like some feedback on the suggestion either by comments on the
> > list or just change the wiki page.
>
>
> Its a shame that Maven plugins do not support the idea of subclassing
> :-) What then would be perfect would be to have the "package" plugin and
> then derive RPM, Deb, etc from that so hence we have the same goals and
> properties and just add on specific things for particular output
> formats. Oh well ...
>
> I'm not sure of how well Maven plugins support the idea of *using* a
> different plugin ... kind of like a sub-plugin ... with this we could
> have a package plugin that gives a lot of the logic for packaging
> systems, and then we have RPM, Deb plugins that use this package plugin.
>
> I think the idea of having a common interface is definitely the way to
> go ...  since the input is basically the same, and the output is a file.
> Obviously there are other formats of "package" ... e.g tgz, zip. What
> I'm not convinced about is whether to have these as a single plugin (and
> have logic internally that checks on the output type and does things
> accordingly), or whether to have separate plugins with the same goals
> and properties.
>
> I think i'd tend towards having separate plugins solely because there
> are projects where you want to output multiple package formats ... so I
> could output a Deb, RPM, and TGZ. If I had these as a single plugin I
> would have to edit my project.properties and then run the plugin, and
> edit it again and run it ... whereas if i have separate plugins I would
> just do "maven rpm", "maven deb", "maven tgz" etc. Having separate
> plugins does give us the problem of maintaining consistency in goal and
> property naming - adopting your "create", "create-snapshot", and
> "copy-resources" in Deb and RPM for now makes a lot of sense.

I think you misunderstod my idea. My idea is to create a set of hooks that
the different package plugins will use. These hooks will be as simple as a
goal named 'package:create'. Then each of the package plugins will have a
goal called '<type>:create'. And for intergrating with the package plugin
it will have a pre or post goal called called 'package:create' that will
simply attain '<type>:create'. When we have a odd cind of subclassing. It
might not be the best solution but it works and it opens for
extendability.

When executing the package:create goal will be something like: (Assuming
there is a deb and rpm plugin and they are registered as post goals)

  package:init-filesystem
  rpm:init-filesystem
  deb:init-filesystem
  package:copy-resources
  deb:copy-resources
  rpm:copy-resources
  package:create
  deb:create
  rpm:create

Now, if I would like to finetune the packaging for a specific type of
package I would use the maven.<type>. namespace for the properties. The
common properties would go in maven.package.

Did I make things a bit clearer? Does anyone like this idea? Does it add
any value to the packaging bit of a project? If there is a consensus about
this idea I would like to change the rpm and deb plugins so that they have
the 'same' goals and to create the maven-package-plugin.

Trygvis