commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [release-plugin] best multi-module project?
Date Wed, 07 Feb 2018 13:31:45 GMT


> On Feb 6, 2018, at 6:28 PM, Gilles <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 5 Feb 2018 21:49:52 -0500, Rob Tompkins wrote:
>>> On Feb 5, 2018, at 3:05 PM, Gilles <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Mon, 5 Feb 2018 14:27:53 -0500, Rob Tompkins wrote:
>>>>> On Feb 5, 2018, at 2:22 PM, Gilles <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org>
wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Mon, 5 Feb 2018 14:17:18 -0500, Rob Tompkins wrote:
>>>>>> Which should be the template multi-module project? They all have
>>>>>> subtle differences that lead to different nuances to the build.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Which differences did you spot?
>>>> 
>>>> Nothing of any particular consequence, just where the main assemblies
>>>> end up. Or which Pom they’re in.
>>> 
>>> What do you mean by "main assemblies"?  If it's the "full"
>>> distribution, then is it a matter of naming the output directory?
>>> It could be configurable.
>>> 
>>> For the config, the main POM looks the appropriate place if it can
>>> be done without side-effects. [For RNG I created a separate directory
>>> because I was not sure how to do it.]
>> 
>> Right….that’s why I was asking which project would be the best
>> standard to work from, and then I could go through and take all of the
>> other multi-module builds and mildly refactor the pom/directory
>> structure to align with which ever we decided was standard.
>> 
>> Is [jcs] the right choice as the standard?
> 
> Why this one rather than another?
> It's not clear what you are looking for.

It really doesn’t matter too much to me, I just wanted to get a community consensus on what
we think a standard directory structure should be, or the exemplar 
multimodule commons project.

It’s just easier to work from a specific project as opposed to trying to generalize immediately.

So my thought right now is either [rng] or [jcs]. 

I suppose another thought could be: is anyone planning a release on a commons multi-module
project anytime soon? If so which?

-Rob

> From what I see wrt the creation of "full dist" artefacts, the
> difference with e.g. [RNG] is that in [jcs], there is a maven
> module, with no code, while for [RNG], there is a directory
> (not a maven module), but both contain a POM whose only purpose
> is to provide an "assembly" config.
> 
> Having no idea on how to achieve it, I'd wish that creating
> the "full dist" only requires a custom "goal" like (?)
> $ mvn package:dist
> with no ad-hoc directory/module: all modules specified in the
> top POM would have their artefacts (recursively) bundled into
>  <component>-dist-<version>.tar.gz
> 
> Regards,
> Gilles
> 
>> Cheers,
>> -Rob
>> 
>>> 
>>> Gilles
>>> 
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> figure we pick one and make that the standard multi-module build
>>>>>> paradigm and fit the others into it.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -Rob
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org <mailto:dev-help@commons.apache.org>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message