Henri Yandell wrote:
Anything wrong with the idea of including commons-build with every source distro?
just that each project then looses its "atomic" status and is dependent on commons-build, I think we need to try to get back to only the site generation being dependent on commons-build, I really starting to believe everything else should be standalone.
I'm all in favour of attempting to enforce similarity on the Commons projects. Anything which is unable to follow the same build pattern is dubious of having a place in Commons in my view. Possibly Maven needs to be better on the inheritence side, but why not standardise on src/java rather than src/share [or vice versa..personally I hate src/share].
I'm not sure where "src/share" came from, I know Maven moved toward "src/main" for main java content and "src/test" for JUnit test content, but all this is overidable in the project.properties.
That way, and with increasing creation of scripts/plugins, commons development can be about the component, not the build system, site, naming conventions, additional tools etc.
To release Commons Xxxx, I want to do: maven jk-commons:release -Dalpha I don't want to spend lots of time figuring out all the little bits. This is a lot of the hold up for me with releasing IO, I've just not had time to get back up to speed with the changes to the commons build process over the last year. [Plus I'm not sure my PGP things work on the new machine as I don't really get PGP :)]
maven jk-commons:new-component would be nice too, and a whole lot of other ones.
Oh so true. I hope this is becoming simpler. Though I'm not convinced we really need to write our own unique goals to attain it.
[rambling of someone who is currently nothing but a disapointment to commons at the moment]
Hen
[ Time to slaughter the sacrificial "Hen"?! ;-) ]
On Wed, 7 Apr 2004, Martin Cooper wrote:
How does this work, though, if someone downloads a source distro? Is there going to be a source distro for commons-build that someone (?) maintains and builds? How would the right version of that get associated with any given component source distro?
The people who usually download source distros often do so because they are not able to use CVS, for whatever reason, to obtain the files that way. So they will not have the ability to use a label to make the version association, and they will need to download a second, separate, source distro in order to build what they originally wanted.
That just doesn't seem workable to me.
-- Martin Cooper
"Gary Gregory" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] IMO, it is fine to say: In order to build [project] you also need [commons-build].
Gary
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Mark Diggory Software Developer Harvard MIT Data Center http://www.hmdc.harvard.edu
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
