David,
Thanks for sharing your insights. You talk about 'pretty much anything
can be done with'. What, in your experience, can't be done -at the
moment- in relation to OFBiz?
Best regards,
Pierre
Op maandag 20 april 2015 heeft David E. Jones <d...@me.com> het volgende
geschreven:
>
> Not to muddy the waters... but Gradle might be a good alternative. There
> is a lot more in it than Ant that "just works" without needing to be
> explicit, especially when you follow Maven conventions for layout of src
> directories.
>
> One big upside of Gradle is that all build files are Groovy scripts and
> you can do pretty much anything in them. One downside is the learning
> curve... there is an extensive DSL with pretty good documentation, but some
> things that would seem simple are non-obvious (to put it generously). On
> the other hand, there is fairly wide use so I still have yet to run
> anything where I couldn't find a solution quickly with a google search.
>
> -David
>
>
> > On 19 Apr 2015, at 22:51, Hans Bakker <mailingl...@antwebsystems.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> > We should seriously consider the comments from Adam and move to maven.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Hans
> > antwebsystems.com
> >
> >
> > On 18/04/15 00:41, Adam Heath wrote:
> >>
> >> On 04/17/2015 10:20 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> >>> Thanks for your detailed heads-up Martin, notably your last point!
> >>>
> >>> I mostly agree, and indeed I also think Maven might not be so bad when
> you start anew (or are forced to use it ;) ) but for OFBiz, really NO!
> >>>
> >>> Jacques
> >>>
> >>> Le 17/04/2015 16:27, Martin Becker a écrit :
> >>>> +1 for lack of benefit (and for fear ;-))
> >>
> >> The commit I did last night took me 45 minutes. Full stop. I started
> at 12:03am. And I did it while drinking a second beer. Maven was that
> simple. I had resisted for years. Years! But when I actually sat down to
> do it, I realized that I did *not* have to change what I was doing. Maven
> could be configured to work with the existing design.
> >>
> >> The benefits are:
> >>
> >> * not having to write our own build system; ant is not a build system.
> >>
> >> * full external dependency management. This can be done very
> incrementally. I just got framework/base to compile, by reusing the
> previously downloaded jars in framework/base/lib. Then, when all
> dependencies are *properly* listed, we can switch to the download
> mechanism, and suddenly, the checkout becomes smaller.
> >>
> >> * full internal dependency support. As part of framework/base now
> having a working pom.xml, it has a dep on framework/start. This can allow
> for end-users wanting to just install applications/party, and having just
> what is required get downloaded.
> >>
> >> * Each ofbiz component could be moved to separate repos, and
> development can progress on its own. All that specialpurpose/* stuff no
> longer needs to be carried along with the rest of the codebase.
> >>
> >> * continuous integration becomes so much simpler; the standard "mvn
> package" call does command-line unit tests, *by default*.
> >>
> >> * these poms do not break anything. Nothing calls them. Everyone can
> continue to use ant, eclipse, or DIP switches, to compile and run ofbiz.
> So, having them in trunk won't cause issue for anyone else. This is the
> way linux-kernel functions. Completely new, isolated features, that affect
> no one else, are added to master/linux-next, so that they can get pushed
> out to more users, for more testing. If something is done in a separate
> branch, they have discovered it doesn't recieve enough widespread testing.
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> My first thoughts:
> >>>>
> >>>> => If a change is desired, than Gradle would surely be a good choice
> as it is the next generation build tool witch tries to combine the
> advantages from tools like ant, maven and others…
> >>
> >> Sure, why not?
> >>
> >>
> >> Besides, I'm the one who created ${ofbiz.home.dir}/macros.xml and
> common.xml, but really, lets not go there.
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>> => I think the stability of Gradle is not a question as it is used by
> projects like Spring, Hibernate, Grails, Groovy and others…
> >>>>
> >>>> => With the ability to use ant tasks and whole ant build scripts
> within Gradle, a smooth migration could be an option
> >>>>
> >>
> >> Maven can call ant. I'm even doing so in the 2 poms that I added.
> >>
> >>>> => Maven rely on it’s convention over configuration pattern, so it is
> never a good idea to NOT follow it’s conventions by configuring it for a
> different project structure for example. So there may be the need for
> massive changes to the OFBiz project structure and so on.
> >>>>
> >>
> >> I just got framework/base to compile with maven. This includes *NO*
> changes to ofbiz layout. framework/base/lib still exists. Nothing is being
> downloaded(except maven plugins, of course).
> >>
> >>>> => Also the ability to only produce one artifact per project in maven
> would perhaps end up in configuring sub projects for each application and
> module in OFBiz with a frustrating handling of multi module configurations
> with version-/release-tags, dependency handling and so on...
> >>>>
> >>
> >> This is wrong. You can produce multiple artifacts. I've seen it done
> in other projects.
> >>
> >>>> => I used maven in multi module project setups before and it has it’s
> nice features, although it is sometimes hard to understand details and
> effects of the build lifecycle or single plugins. But the main fact is,
> that this were green-field projects, so things in terms of convention over
> configuration are much easier to adopt than in legacy projects like an
> OFBiz…
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>> => The change of the build tool for OFBiz would be a fundamental
> change, particularly for upgrading existing installations. So a change to
> the project structure could be a deathblow to OFBiz vendor imports in
> customer projects. I think it could be a good starting point to look at
> Gradle and see if there is a wise way to use the strength and new features
> of a modern build tool without the need to turn things inside out in OFBiz.
> >>>>
> >>
> >> I'm not just some noob in ofbiz. I've been around for quite a bit.
> I've been around when ofbiz was still using CVS. I was the first to start
> using git locally for ofbiz development, and for our own ofbiz
> extensions/fixes/client work. I've also been invovled with Debian in years
> past, being involved in several migrations. I also added generics(and
> enhanced for loops, etc), to *all* of framework, to spearhead that
> project. But seriously, moving on.
> >>
> >> But, what structure changes have I propsed? None. I've got it working
> with the exsting layout. Nothing has turned inside out.
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>> Martin Becker
> >>>> ecomify GmbH
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Am 17.04.2015 um 13:56 schrieb Jacques Le Roux <
> jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com <javascript:;>>:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Le 17/04/2015 12:49, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
> >>>>>> On Apr 17, 2015, at 4:39 AM, Taher Alkhateeb <
> slidingfilame...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi All,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thank you for your work but I thought we are more inclined to move
> to gradle based build systems given its many advantages as a full
> programming language build system based on groovy.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Taher Alkhateeb
> >>>>>> I agree: we could explore the switch to Gradle and also review the
> way our source files (Java, Groovy and Minilang/xml) are organized (we
> could actually follow the layout that is considered the default for Maven
> and Gradle and possibly other tools).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Jacopo
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> I don't know if Gradle is stable now, but I'd surely be for instead
> of Maven. If ever we really desire to move from Ant, I don't clearly see
> the necessity at this stage...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jacques
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >
>
>
--
Pierre Smits
*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com
