directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <>
Subject Re: [Studio] Mavenization status - Remaning issues
Date Tue, 05 Feb 2008 22:04:50 GMT

On Feb 5, 2008, at 11:03 AM, Felix Knecht wrote:

> Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot schrieb:
>> Hi all,
>> Here is a status on the last issues we have, and some proposals to  
>> solve them.
>> *• Studio Maven Repository*
>> The Studio Maven Repository is currently located at http:// 
>> This is not really an ideal situation and we have to find it a  
>> better solution.
>> If all the Eclipse dependencies we need were on the standard Maven  
>> repositories, Emmanuel and I think we could get rid of our project  
>> specific repository by deploying our studio related jars (studio- 
>> launcher, studio-dsml-parser, etc.) on those standard Maven  
>> repositories. This way all our dependencies would be on Maven  
>> repositories.
> Of course we can also use any other available server for this if  
> somebody raises the finger saying "I do have enough space,  
> bandwith, availability and want to host the needed dependencies on  
> my server".

What are the obstacles to getting the required artifacts published to  
maven central?
>> As we can't do that at the moment, I propose we switch back to a  
>> local maven repository located inside SVN.
>> This is exactly like we're doing with Ant/Ivy at the moment.
>> It takes some extra time when doing a checkout, but it does not  
>> create overload on the <http:// 
>>> server each time we build Studio.
>> I remember, we had that in place some time ago in the Maven build.  
>> I also remember there were minor issues, but I can't remember  
>> exactly what they were (something like a $local-repository folder  
>> created I think). Can someone help me recover my memories ?
> Yes, this were the problems we have and probably will have again.

I'm not sure what this solution was.  In geronimo we have a  
"repository" subproject for stuff that isn't published.  it has a  
repository inside and the pom has dependencies on all of these jars,  
and a <repository> tag pointing to it.  Building this project gets  
all the dependencies into your local maven repo.  We don't think this  
is close to ideal but it works.

>> Do you think this is a suitable solution and, Felix, it is  
>> possible to come back to this solution ?
> It can be a way to go. Change the repository url in the root pom ad  
> check in the dependencies.
>> *• Parent Pom*
>> We currently depend on the 9-SNAPSHOT version of the Directory  
>> project pom.
>> This situation forces us to checkout and build Apache DS first,  
>> before building Apache Directory Studio.
>> It takes a lot of time... :(
>> I would suggest we use the 8 version of the Directory project pom,  
>> the last published version available.
>> WDYT ?*
> When I started with the maven build for the studio I said to myself  
> "Just take the latest existing dependencies and see if I can get it  
> work." From my POV there are objections taking the '8' pom if it  
> fits the needs.
You definitely don't want to use a snapshot here... the idea was to  
publish a new version of the project pom whenever a change was  
needed.  However, you can check out just the parent and build it...  
that's just 1 project, about 2 seconds.  Also remember about mvn -N  
which does not build any subprojects/children.

david jencks
>> • Apache DS and Shared dependencies*
>> The last problem we face is our dependencies to jars of the Apache  
>> DS project.
>> The Shared dependencies are no longer a problem as we'll have a  
>> new version released especially for Studio very soon (tomorrow  
>> maybe...).
>> The Apache DS dependencies have been checked by Emmanuel and he  
>> told me that we can use the 1.5.1 version (available on Maven  
>> repositories).
>> So, there should be no more dependencies issues.
>> With the 2 last problems resolved, we won't need anymore to  
>> checkout and build Apache DS prior to building Apache Directory  
>> Studio and we'll have, I think, a working and release ready Maven  
>> build.
> Hip hip hurry :-)
>> A build system which could be subject to a vote for switching to  
>> it...
> Go for it. You'll have my nonbinding +1 for sure (what else after  
> the work ;-) ). But I really need to let it up to you to say if  
> it's stable and usable enough - you have the experience of working/ 
> developing studio.
> Regards
> Felix

View raw message