james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Felix Knecht <fel...@apache.org>
Subject Refactoring TLP pom (was Re: Mailbox doc)
Date Sun, 09 Oct 2011 14:58:32 GMT
On 10/09/2011 11:28 AM, Felix Knecht wrote:
Hi all

I setup a small sample how this could look alike when splitting things 
off and discard legacy things.

Have a TLP pom.xml (james-parent / james-project or ...) being a merge 
of the 2 former TLP/parent poms [1][2]. New the pluginManagement section 
will contain all the plugins with their version and their configuration 
so far this can be applied to each module. This is specially the case 
for the site generation (not only javadoc).

The skin module [3] is no longer part of the TLP pom module but has its 
own module space lets name it james-skin which is less irritating than 
maven-skin at first glance.

What shall happen with the existing project tree [1], which will become 
obsolete? Will it be replace by the proposed TLP module (when it gets 
named 'james-project') or does it just stays as it is and a new module 
'parent' for TLP module is created?

Another approach than splitting up in different modules is to clean up 
the current parent.pom [4] so it contains more or less only the 
definitions to build  the project maven-skin and the project module. 
This will mean [4] will not have a <parent> definition (and all the 
other stuff like <properties>, <developers>, ...) at all and the TLP pom 
will be the current project.pom [5]. Definitions now in the parent.pom 
[4] will be merged into the new TLP pom [5]. The new TLP pom [5] will 
have as parent org.apache/apache.

When going the 2nd way B) we should IMO move the legacy server [6] tree 
to somewhere else as it is no longer used.



I also setup mailbox in my sandbox project [7] to see if and how it 
works. I'm neither able to generate the site (mvn site) nor to genrate 
the technical reports (mvn site -Psite-reports). In both situations I 
get following error which is hardly a problem of the new structure using 
the demo poms but resulting of the javadoc-plugin configuration somehow. 
Do you haven any ideas what could be wrong?

[ERROR] Failed to execute goal 
org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-javadoc-plugin:2.8:aggregate (default) on 
project apache-james-mailbox: An error has occurred in JavaDocs report 
[ERROR] Exit code: 1 - javadoc: error - 
doesn't exist or is not readable.
[ERROR] Command line was: /usr/lib/jvm/jdk1.7.0/jre/../bin/javadoc 
-J-Xmx1024m -J-Xms256m @options @packages

[1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/james/project/trunk
[2] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/james/project/trunk/project
[3] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/james/project/trunk/maven-skin
[4] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/james/project/trunk/pom.xml
[5] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/james/project/trunk/project/pom.xml
[6] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/james/project/trunk/project/server
[7] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/james/trunk/sandbox/felixk/mailbox

> Hi Eugen
> Your right :-)
> On 10/08/2011 09:18 PM, Ioan Eugen Stan wrote:
>> Thanks, I am not familiar with the installation for the rest of the
>> implementations, including guice. Maybe you can put in some words
>> about them?
>> For now, I am trying to make APIviz docs just for mailbox, and it
>> seems that the pom hierarchy is very complex. I have a solution for
>> standard javadoc:javadoc but that doesn't apply for site generation. I
>> will try to find a way to configure the site generation javadoc plugin
>> so all is ok.
>> I did notice that the pom files need some clean-up and refactoring.
>> For example, for javadoc-plugin there is a lot of duplicate
>> configuration. I suggest we move a lot of the common configuration to
>> PluginManagement and dependencyManagement sections in the parent pom
>> and rely on inheritance to solve the rest of the issues.
> IMO we could do this for all kind of reporting plugins, not only for the
> javadoc one. Most of are used in the maven-site-plugin anyway. This
> would mean, that parent pom (org.apache.james/james-project.pom) will be
> released quite often, e.g. when updating to the latest reporting plugin
> versions. I'm not aware, that we can change the version but keep the
> configuration in a child pom, but maybe anybody knows more about this.
> Doing the configurations in the parent pom would make the child poms
> smaller.
> I wonder if we could not even merge the james-parent.pom and the
> james-project.pom into james-parent.pom? AFAICS james.project.pom would
> build legacy documentation for the server what is commented anyway.
> Doing so the project/project/src/site would need to be moved one level
> up as well (into james-parent.pom)
> We could even clean up the directory tree and move the legacy server 2.x
> stuff into a branch or to attic or where ever and have the james-parent
> renamed to the real name 'james-parent' from 'james-project', containg
> only the parent pom including pluginManagement section (including
> configurations for plugins used be site generation such as javadoc,
> findbugs and others) and the stuff for general site src stuff which is
> located atm @project/project/src/site.
> wdot?
> Regards
> Felix
>> What do you think?
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org

To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org

View raw message