james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Eric Charles <e...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Refactoring TLP pom (was Re: Mailbox doc)
Date Wed, 12 Oct 2011 09:36:18 GMT
Hi Felix,

Thx for launching the discussion and implementing in a sandbox :)

I feel your focus is the maven-skin. Right?

I am also concerned with the way we handle the version dependencies. 
Example: For now, each of the project (imap, mailbox...) has freedom to 
define the derby version. This sometimes can give issues, as projects 
are implemented/tested against a specific version, and this can give 
issues. So, Should parent impose the version, or should we leave freedom 
to subprojects to do so?

Also, the transitive dependencies are sometimes/often declared around 
(example, if a project uses mailbox-jpa, it still declares openjpa 
altough openjpa is a transitive dependency of mailbox-jpa). For example, 
I'm puzzled to need to exclude jruby in all projects. If we rely on the 
transitive resolution, we only have to exclude once. This point is not 
directly related to the parent structure, but more linked to a 
'transitive dependency' discussion. But I feel it's also linked to the 
pom hierarchy in a way...

I don't bring answers but questions here...

Thx,
Eric

On 09/10/11 16:58, Felix Knecht wrote:
> On 10/09/2011 11:28 AM, Felix Knecht wrote:
> Hi all
>
> A)
> 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?
>
> B)
> 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.
>
> wdyt?
>
> Regards
> Felix
>
> PS
> @Eugen
> 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
> generation:
> [ERROR] Exit code: 1 - javadoc: error -
> /home/felix/svn/apache/james/trunk/sandbox/felixk/mailbox/target/classes
> doesn't exist or is not readable.
> [ERROR]
> [ERROR] Command line was: /usr/lib/jvm/jdk1.7.0/jre/../bin/javadoc
> -J-Xmx1024m -J-Xms256m @options @packages
> [ERROR]
>
>
>
> [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
>

-- 
Eric
http://about.echarles.net

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


Mime
View raw message