qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steve Vinoski <vino...@iona.com>
Subject Re: maven
Date Tue, 05 Sep 2006 21:16:16 GMT
Will do.

--steve

On Sep 5, 2006, at 5:08 PM, Carl Trieloff wrote:

>
> Steve,
>
> can you maybe write a mail on any implications you see on the  
> current code and structure. This would help me understand
> what we are in for if we got general agreement that this is what we  
> should do. I know some had reservations previously but
> don't recall what they where.
>
> Carl.
>
>
> Steve Vinoski wrote:
>> Hi Carl, I'm happy to do it whenever the group feels it would be  
>> best, but I'd rather not wait too long after it hits the  
>> incubator, because the longer we wait, the more difficult it gets.
>>
>> So far I haven't found anything too difficult. As Alan said, the  
>> existing directory structure isn't too far off what maven prefers,  
>> and thus so far it seems to be a matter of properly identifying  
>> dependencies and using a maven plugin for the XSLT code generation  
>> steps.
>>
>> --steve
>>
>> On Sep 5, 2006, at 4:37 PM, Carl Trieloff wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Steve,
>>>
>>> if we decide to add, go to.. maven builds do you mind if we do  
>>> that post the code move to
>>> Apache. We still have some work to do to get the code into it's  
>>> new home and I am scared that
>>> this might complicate this process. It might not, but I would  
>>> prefer to get the code move
>>> behind us before introducing this.
>>>
>>> Carl.
>>>
>>>
>>> Alan Conway wrote:
>>>> +1 as long as I don't have to do it ;)
>>>>
>>>> I haven't used maven a lot but from the little I've used it it  
>>>> seems to
>>>> eliminate a lot of the repetative junk that gets re-hashed on every
>>>> project.
>>>> The existing directory structure is very close to the maven  
>>>> standard so
>>>> I don't see any big problems in the reorg.
>>>> On Tue, 2006-09-05 at 16:04 -0400, Steve Vinoski wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to "mavenize" the Qpid build (specifically with Maven  
>>>>> 2, of  course). We have more than a few dependencies, such as  
>>>>> log4j, a bunch  of jakarta commons stuff, some mina stuff,  
>>>>> saxon, and xmlbeans, and  maven could help manage all that and  
>>>>> any future dependencies we  create, such as for persistence.  
>>>>> But maven brings other major  benefits too, such as single  
>>>>> commands to set up Eclipse or IntelliJ  workspaces, commands to  
>>>>> measure code coverage, commands to run code  style checkers,  
>>>>> etc. I also think the standard maven directory  structure helps  
>>>>> enforce subproject unit testing, as the tests and the  sources  
>>>>> sit in peer directories under each subproject.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now would be a good time to do this, obviously, given the code  
>>>>> moving  into the incubator. Unless everyone hates the idea,  
>>>>> I'll keep working  on it in my private workspace and try to  
>>>>> have it ready by the end of  the week. Obviously, if anyone has  
>>>>> any major concerns, please voice  them here.
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks,
>>>>> --steve
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@etp.108.redhat.com
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@etp.108.redhat.com
>


Mime
View raw message