On Tue, 26 Mar 2002 22:19, Jeff Turner wrote: > On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 07:38:16PM +1100, Peter Donald wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Today I had the opportunity to go have a look at a few of the build > > management tools. Theres some fantastic stuff going on right now with > > regards to this stuff. > > ... > > > Anyways they all look like fantastic steps forward. Thus I think we > > should eventually move to one of them when they are matured. All of them > > are way to dynamic at the moment for using unless we were willing to > > constantly monitor them - which would be too big an investment IMHO. > > Dunno.. the Turbine projects manage okay, and we've got Maven's inventor > here on the list being helpful.. :)
I believe I saw Jon say that today that the turbine build system is broken - wrt to how the central jar repository is managed and also wrt the fact that most turbine projects haven't built in gump for a LONG time ;) Im sure it is only time before this is resolved but other similar issues will need to be resolved in the future. Personally I would prefer to skip the growing pains. I can see it is fairly good now and will be great in the future if things keep going. However it would require too much of an effort that I am not willing to put in just now to keep up with it as it evolves. If Jason was an avalon committer and was as dedicated to maintaining avalons build system as he is to turbines then I would say lets go for it. However it would end up being one of us maintianing it and I just dont have the cycle required to keep up with its evolution atm - so there would need to be some one else to volunteer to do it ... ;) > > So what to do in the meantime? Well for the meantime I say we stick with > > what we got. We can refactor out some commonalities into top-level build > > files (like the jdepend stuff) that don't need to be in each project > > file. Some things (like checkstyle) need to be in each projects build.xml > > so we can leave them there for the moment. > > Can't do much factoring out if we want components to be independently > buildable :/ We don't need the jdepend targets in end products so I will zap them. I had also planned to add some other targets into the projects (auditing via metamatas tools, generating website, uploading releases, etc) which don't need to be put in per-project build.xml because our end users wont need those targets. We can put them in the top-level build.xml and then do releases from there. Anyways just about to zap jdepend stuff from build.xmls now and add it into main build.xml ;) > ... > > > Thoughts on any of this? > > Glad you're keen on the general idea of adopting one of these beasties. > I'll keep going with <style> for now. > > --Jeff > > > -- > > Cheers, > > > > Pete -- Cheers, Pete ------------------------------ Kitsch never goes out of style ------------------------------ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
