Hello!
No more than a month after the 0.34 release. If the main thing with the
0.35.1 release is the change in the release tools we could make the first
releases of the 0.35.* in synch with updates of the release tool.
/Linus
2011/8/16 Mark Fortner <[email protected]>
> 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=2822151
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]]
