On Monday 13 December 2004 13:16, Adam R. B. Jack wrote: > but I really figured the Gump metadata would be tweaked > to fit what Maven had defined. Shame if that isn't so.
Well, there are two sides to this story; 1. Gump should circumvent any obstacle provided by the buildsystem in each project. 2. Maven wants to automatically generate a functional Gump descriptor. If you do 2. in Maven, you will need some help from the projects to make it so. If you don't care about 2., you can probably manage with the existing features in Maven, and need to look at the inter-project issues, such as * Mismatch between Gump project names and Maven artifactIDs. * Multiple artifactIDs with the same name, but different groups. * Same artifacts with different artifactIDs and different groups. If you do 2., you can rely on that being set up in each Maven project to aid Gump (just like has been done with Magic for the Avalon projects). I can sense that Brett and myself are leaning more towards the 2. , whereas for instance Adam and Stefan(o) are more favourable of 1. Both have their technical and social strengths. But I think we need to conclude which way to go. Cheers Niclas -- +------//-------------------+ / http://www.dpml.net / / http://niclas.hedhman.org / +------//-------------------+ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
