Hi
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:15:57 +0100
Christian Grobmeier <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> @Christian: i think the packaging is working for me now. I got your
> points with the pear packaging problem... I am thinking that the only
> benefit of this pear package command is the validation and we could
> leave it off by doing it ourselves. But lets leave it the way you
> solved the issue.
The benefit of the pear package command is that it generates the package.xml
which pear needs. As this package.xml also contains a classification which
file should be regarded as php, data or doc I fear we cannot replace this
with the maven-assembly-plugin :-(
> Ok, so the complete build would be:
>
> mvn package -> creates the sourcecode only based pear package
> mvn site -> creates the site
> mvn assembly:assembly -> creates the assemblies for distribution
The first one is not neccessary, assembly:assembly calls "package":
$ mvn help:describe -Dcmd=assembly:assembly -Ddetail
...
Before this mojo executes, it will call:
Phase: 'package'
>
> I can live with just three commands - any other objections?
>
> If no, we should take care about svn copy, deploy plugin and others.
> Commons does have good stuff over there, but I do not know if we can
> use the tools without pain :-)
Hm, using plugins for this would be nice and I also have the
maven-release-plugin
in mind which automatically tags the current working copy, changes the version
in pom.xml and builts a release from a checkout copy of the tagged version
etc...
But shouldn't we focus on making the release somewhen *really* soon now?
If you ack the LOG4PHP-84 changes then there is no bug with the 2.0 tag left
and
I have the bad feeling that the whole voting and incubating process that we have
to pass will tax my patience enough and we shouldn't prolong it any more :-)
bye,
-christian-
