James Carman wrote:
Well, I think it's pretty obvious that we need to start a new maven plugin
project for commons. So, why don't we just get started? Do we have to vote
on something like that? Are we going to make it a Maven2 or Maven1 plugin?
This is something that we need to decide before we get started. The
plugin architecture is quite different between maven 1 and 2.
Do we want to make everyone upgrade their POMs? Where will the code for the
plugin live?
One a side note, why isn't there an XSLT stylesheet for translating old POMs
to new ones? You'd think that'd be pretty easy to do to at least get one
that runs in Maven2. Anyway, that's just my rant from my experience trying
to Maven2-ize commons-proxy at one time. Now, back to our normally
scheduled programming. :-)
There is work being done on some sort of conversion utility over in
maven land.
-----Original Message-----
From: robert burrell donkin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 4:52 AM
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [all] Maven, help or hinderance?
On Sat, 2005-12-17 at 01:16 -0500, Henri Yandell wrote:
I just got coding on Commons stuff again after a bit of an absence.
UGH! I don't mean to diss the good work that people have put in on
adapting maven to fit what we want, but given that I use maven daily
at work and with osjava hacking, it's amazing how complex this seems.
As I said, it's not the fault of those making the impossible possible,
rather I think it's that we need to give up some of our desires and
simplify our usage of Maven. ie) our very specific needs need to be
challenged and made to justify themselves.
Maybe I'm being a bit harsh :)
i think that there are two different kinds of specific need here. IMO
both are not negotiable (for different reasons).
the ASF has a few specific needs which maven either does not provide at
the moment (for example, NOTICE.xml) or which maven should not provide
since they are too specific to the ASF (for example, the symlink build
structure). these needs are non-negotiable.
i think that these needs are best satisfied by the creation of a jakarta
or apache plug-in as suggested by brett.
there are another set of needs which fall under best practise. over the
last year (or two), the commons has started to come under intense
scrutiny. we are now the establishment and any times that we fall short
of the highest standards, we can expect to be held up as examples of bad
practise throughout the java community. i agree with stephen that our
releases now need to be of the highest possible standard. i'm no longer
to willing to accept lower quality releases as a result of using maven.
so again, these are not negotiable.
in the past, we haven't been very effective (as we might) at feeding
through these emerging best practises to maven. it's pretty much been
only phil. i'm going to try to be more active (and hope others will do
the same). however, it is clear that one problem we have is that the
feedback cycle is too inefficient: we can't afford to wait a month or
two for new plugin releases and we're finding it hard to ensure everyone
has the required versions. perhaps managing our plugin would made this
easier.
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--
Dennis Lundberg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
