Yes!
I also thing we don't use maven2.
+1 to use ant
Peter
Am 28.02.2006 um 19:49 schrieb Bill Barker:
-----Original Message-----
From: Costin Manolache [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 10:24 AM
To: Tomcat Developers List
Subject: Re: Tomcat 6 source organisation
On 2/28/06, Peter Rossbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We can have maven2 dependency management without use maven2
complete.
see. http://maven.apache.org/ant-tasks.html
We've had some problems with the <m2 /> tasks over in Gump-land.
I have no problem with using maven or similar tasks for downloading
the deps, if they
can provide the same functionality with our build hacks, or at least
use them for the simple
cases.
I'm not sure that Maven could handle the current tomcat-dbcp task
well, and
I don't really see a use-case for a mixed dependency management system
myself.
I'm just -1 on using a framework that forces a particular way to do
things ( nothing personal
with maven, same -1 for any other framework :-). I know people have
religious ideas about
right and wrong, and frameworks is an expression of this - I just
hope
I won't see this in tomcat...
Also my personal opinion. Also, Gump doesn't currently support
Maven2, so
we'd loose Gump by going to Maven2 (which, some people might think is
a-good-thing :).
It may be good to look at what other options exists for download and
pick one that is easy to use and fits well - maven might be the best
or not, that's one benefit of picking components and tools instead of
'they know better' frameworks.
Costin
I thing maven is good for standard prepare/compile/test,
but is heavy
to use with spezial things like the current tomcat release build. I
have heard that some "go back to ant" discussion start at the
jetspeed project.
Peter
Am 28.02.2006 um 17:50 schrieb Keith Wannamaker:
+1 for consolidating into a single module/src folder.
maven has matured since I last looked. It seems the biggest
advantages for us would be dependency management and a
common build
layout. I don't have a feel for how much work it would take to
convert, but it doesn't seem like we would loose much if that
approach were taken.
Keith
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Hi,
I think it is time to decide how the source repository
is going to
be organized, with the questions being:
- how many source folders do we need (Costin wanted one, while
others like Jacob seem to want "modules") ?
- do we continue to use Ant ?
- etc
Any ideas ?
Rémy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) listed
above as the intended recipient(s), and may contain information
that is PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not an intended
recipient, you may not read, copy, or distribute this message or
any attachment. If you received this communication in error, please
notify us immediately by e-mail and then delete all copies of this
message and any attachments.
In addition you should be aware that ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail
sent through the Internet is not secure. Do not send confidential
or sensitive information, such as social security numbers, account
numbers, personal identification numbers and passwords, to us via
ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
