A few of supplementary points: 1) The CMake system will not be required to generate pom files or deploy to maven repositories. 2) The CMake system will not be required to perform dynamic dependency resolution 3) The CMake system will not be required to integrate with other build/test tooling (coverage reports, style checkers, etc) which may be provided within the maven build system
I'm also not sure exactly how well the CMake build system will work with the Java build on Windows systems (my guess would be "not well")... we should probably look to make it work if we can, but this may not be trivial. -- Rob On 15 February 2013 11:03, Phil Harvey <p...@philharveyonline.com> wrote: > During the review [1] of PROTON-238, Alan made the following, > not-entirely-unreasonable-sounding comment: > > "Having 2 parllel build systems is a serious pain, as qpid demonstrates. > Wouldn't it be better to leave maven for Java and cmake for everything > else? People who want to build Java probably can get maven." > (Alan: please forgive me if I've taken this of context) > > I don't particularly want to open this can of worms again, but I think it > is worth addressing this question. I believe the conclusions we reached in > PROTON-194 were: > > - Our CMake build system will be capable of building and testing everything > (both C and Java). It is required because some users who wish to build > Proton don't have Maven access. > - Our Maven build system will be retained because it is a more standard > build tool for Java developers. > > I acknowledge that maintaining both build systems is an annoying > duplication of effort. However, our requirements are to provide a > convenient build system for all our users so we have no choice. > > Please shout if you disagree. > > Phil > > [1] https://reviews.apache.org/r/9433/ >
