Hi Linus,
That sounds good.  When do you anticipate 0.35.1 would be released?

Mark


On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Linus Tolke Tigris <[email protected]>wrote:

> Hello again Mark!
>
> I am not ready to change anything in the release process for the 0.34
> release. (The poms are not currently used by the release process so they can
> be changed.)
>
> Beginning with release 0.35.1 I think it would be a good idea to use a new
> maven/pom release. I expect problems so I want several releases to get this
> to work.
>
>         /Linus
>
> 2011/8/16 Mark Fortner <[email protected]>
>
>> Hi Linus,
>> I'd like to get the rest of the ArgoUML project POMs to a workable state.
>>  The JAR files that are produced now don't include the source files (and are
>> thus closer to being deployable).  I'm working on getting the assemblies
>> going, but the non-standard directory layout means that this process is
>> taking longer than I'd like.
>>
>> The only pending changes at this moment are Laurent's patch to address
>> UML2 diagrams.  I'd like to get the DiagramUtilTest working as well in order
>> to exercise this properly.  But there are some problems initializing the
>> model in a unit test which I'm trying to suss out.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Linus Tolke Tigris <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> Hello again Mark!
>>>
>>> I still don't see the restored ant build for the argoprint project (and I
>>> can't find the libraries' jars). I will have to leave the argoprint out of
>>> the 0.34.alpha1 release.
>>>
>>> How shall we handle this further? Shall we not include argoprint in the
>>> 0.34 release or shall we do a special effort to go back? Are there
>>> functional changes done to argoprint after the move or can I move back to
>>> before for the 0.34 release?
>>>
>>>         /Linus
>>>
>>> 2011/8/9 Mark Fortner <[email protected]>
>>>
>>>> Hi Linus,
>>>> I'll restore the ant build.
>>>>
>>>> I'll be glad to help out with changing up the other projects -- although
>>>> I'm not sure I have checkin karma for the main argouml project.
>>>>
>>>> The main reason for moving the source trees around is that it reduces
>>>> the amount of configuration that you have to do.  The primary problem I was
>>>> having with the current source tree is that resources were not being copied
>>>> into the target directory properly and I would end up with an unusable JAR
>>>> file.  Instead of creating a "META-INF/services/**" it would create
>>>> "/services/**".  After using maven for a couple of years, I've come to the
>>>> conclusion that using the default locations for things is definitely easier
>>>> than trying to shoehorn a non-standard directory structure into a maven
>>>> build.  It's kinda like petting a cat backwards -- you can do it, but
>>>> neither you nor the cat will be happy. ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Mark
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 5:34 AM, Linus Tolke Tigris <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello Mark!
>>>>>
>>>>> Since argoprint is now a part of the argouml release that uses the ant
>>>>> build that must still work for the release to work.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would prefer to move to maven in the same way for all argouml
>>>>> projects and not start in this end. Would you consider doing this on all
>>>>> argouml projects and not only the argoprint one?
>>>>>
>>>>> Why would you want to move the source trees? What is the problem with
>>>>> the source layout as described in
>>>>> http://argouml.tigris.org/wiki/Source_layout?
>>>>>
>>>>>         /Linus
>>>>>
>>>>> 2011/8/6 Mark Fortner <[email protected]>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Does anyone have any objections if I completely mavenize ArgoPrint?
>>>>>>  The reason I'm contemplating this is to make building it easier,
>>>>>> minimize (or remove altogether) the number of libraries stored in svn 
>>>>>> and to
>>>>>> standardize the directory structure.  Here are some of the effects this
>>>>>> would have:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    - The ant build-related artifacts and directories would be
>>>>>>    removed.
>>>>>>    - The libraries would be removed
>>>>>>    - The source and test trees would move
>>>>>>    moved/reorganized/standardized
>>>>>>    - The maven nature would be added to the Eclipse .project (meaning
>>>>>>    if you wanted to build it with Eclipse you'd have to have the maven 
>>>>>> plugin).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any feedback or suggestions about this is always welcome.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mark
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

------------------------------------------------------
http://argouml.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=450&dsMessageId=2822131

To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: 
[[email protected]].
To be allowed to post to the list contact the mailing list moderator, email: 
[[email protected]]

Reply via email to