-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Simon,
Simon Kitching wrote: > On Sat, 2005-10-01 at 02:47 +0200, Joerg Hohwiller wrote: > >>As I have checked with offical releases ant seems >>to be the master and maven is just there for other reasons (maybe the site >>generation). > > > Yes, this is the case. > > Up until now, commons-logging has always been built with Ant, with Maven > just used for the website. > > After the last release I put some significant work into trying to use > Maven to build and test commons-logging. However the situation where we > need to bundle loggers for log4j12 and log4j13 but these two libraries > are binary-incompatible makes it even harder to use Maven. > > Unfortunately, the result of my work is that the maven build initially > looks like it might be usable, but actually isn't. I really should strip > out all the code that even attempts to build the release jar. > > > >>For me the question is: >>Is the API-jar build in maven.xml just legacy and can be kicked out? >>Or on the other hand has someone evaluated if the test issue can be solved >>with >>a recent maven version and the ant can be replaced and kicked out? > > > As you may have seen, the way unit testing is done has undergone a > radical revision (by me). It was extremely convoluted before, and is > hopefully now saner. I hoped that one of the outcomes was to be able to > build/test from maven, but the log4j incompatibility issues then blew > that goal out of the water again. > > And unfortunately 2 months ago I ran out of time for working on > commons-logging (combination of new relationship and new job; need 25 > hours in the day *without* any open-source work!). Thanks for making this clear. > > If you think you can get this application building with Maven, then > please have a go. It will be a challenge. We'll the only idea I have right now is to add (fictive) subprojects for the two log4j versions. That might be an easy solution. My time is also very limitted, but I will give it a try to play around and we'll see. Anyways I hope there is anybody left from commons-logging for my "getChildLogger" proposal. I am very keen on that. If someone would have a look at it and let me know what else to do to make it happen to be committed, I would be very pleased. I already added a test for the new Logger features within the patch. I would write additional information and potential FAQ entries. But at the current moment I get very few feedback at all about what I want and think. So I do not have a clue if my patch will be accepted. > > Regards, > > Simon Regards Jörg -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDPu3hmPuec2Dcv/8RAtyLAJ0RU6aWxqbWeol+3sIZVhBE9aGu3ACcDdAI 1xAcqnpMhGo4lAGg8sMcSxM= =oXbU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
