Lewis, what is the CI run right now? Is it using Ant+ivy or Maven?

- Henry

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:21 PM, Enis Söztutar <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> That sounds like a plan. I have also worked with modular projects in Maven
> and did not
> notice major problems. So if you are confident that we can maintain minimal
> headache
> then we should keep the current structure of the modules.
>
> Thanks,
> Enis
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hey Enis,
>>
>> Honestly, I wasn't going to push it, but I've felt the same way since
>> pushing to roll 0.1.1 and actually getting Maven working. I'm super
>> comfortable with Maven and though I can fumble around and get
>> Ant + Ivy working it's certainly not my wheelhouse.
>>
>> My literal plan was to push forward on the GORA issue I filed to
>> roll forward the Maven poms from 0.1.1 (that mostly work), get them
>> fully working with 0.2-incubating, and then volunteer my time
>> to continue to maintain the poms.
>>
>> I'm +0 on collapsing into a single project -- Maven is really fine
>> with multi-module projects and it's quite a bit easier in my mind
>> to do that. I have no worries about maintaining the current module-based
>> structure for Gora so long as we're using Maven.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Chris
>>
>> On Oct 12, 2011, at 11:07 AM, Enis Söztutar wrote:
>>
>> > Hi guys,
>> >
>> > I know we have discussed this previously in Maven vs Ant+Ivy flame wars,
>> and
>> > the consensus was staying with Ant+Ivy, and keeping Maven artifacts.
>> > However, looking at the recent list of issues, and dev threads, I seems
>> > unfortunate that because of the build system that we have right now,
>> builds,
>> > tests, nightlies and releases are becoming a major problem. And it is sad
>> > that most of the dev effort goes to the build system instead of improving
>> > core Gora.
>> >
>> > Initially, I had setup the project organization to be modular with and
>> > Ant+Ivy setup, which I guess, served well to this day. But since I cannot
>> > spend much effort for maintaining the build, and most of the active
>> > developers are more comfortable with Maven, I guess it is time to
>> simplify
>> > things a little and solve this build problem once and for all, so that we
>> > can spend more time focusing on core features.
>> >
>> > So what I am proposing is to have a volunteer for the build system who
>> wants
>> > to maintain the builds, and completely switch to Maven, and possibly
>> getting
>> > rid of the modular structure, and go with a one-module organization.
>> Having
>> > a modular project is great, and releasing different artifacts for hbase,
>> > cassandra, sql, tutorial, etc is the preferred way, but again, it may be
>> > causing more headaches. The volunteer maintainer will develop the
>> patch(es)
>> > for completely switching to Maven, and will oversee the build-related
>> > issues.
>> >
>> > What do you guys think?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Enis
>>
>>
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
>> Senior Computer Scientist
>> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
>> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
>> Email: [email protected]
>> WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
>> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to