Here we have a minor dilemma. I might count as a qualified person, but I'm a bit swamped and there is some feeling that mentoring and developering should be distinct. Maybe I'll have a look and see what I see.
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 8:48 PM, Patricia Shanahan <[email protected]> wrote: > Is there any chance that we could borrow an Ant-to-Maven expert to do the > conversion, either now or at some later time? Presumably, there are people > working on other projects who have already done this a time or two. > > The River build looks too complicated to me to be a good choice for anyone's > first Maven project, but maintaining the Maven build once it is working > would presumably be significantly easier. The Ant-to-Maven expert would not > need to make a long term commitment to River. > > Patricia > > > On 8/25/2010 5:10 PM, Jonathan Costers wrote: >> >> I think the main issue is that none of us are experts in Maven. >> The River project is quite complex and wouldn't directly fit into the >> standard Maven paradigms. >> >> some examples: >> - packaging our artificacts (using classdep) >> - dependency management (using Class-Path in manifests, -dl dependencies) >> - running our test suites from a Maven build >> >> I think it would certainly be possible to overcome these hurdles, and if I >> had more time to spend I would certainly take a closer look. >> Up until now however, since we have a basic build working (with Ant, >> unfortunately) and have the contributed test harness integrated in that, >> focus has been on increasing test coverage by enabling more tests. >> >> Enabling these contributed tests is important because they were previously >> used by Sun for QA and regression testing their Jini distributions. >> Every day we can't run all of these tests is a risk that bugs are >> (re)introduced without notice (in fact, it already happened). >> >> 2010/8/26 Benson Margulies<[email protected]> >> >>> I haven't looked at the River build. Does it have a lot of intricate >>> antification that's hard to map? >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Jonathan Costers >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> very true ... if we would be able to switch to a Maven build, many >>> >>> headaches >>>> >>>> would be avoided. >>>> >>>> the switching itself is not as easy as it may seem though ... >>>> >>>> 2010/8/26 Benson Margulies<[email protected]> >>>> >>>>> Well, you could switch to a maven build and let the release plugin >>>>> worry about this. >>>>> >>>>> *** humorous intrusion *** >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Jonathan Costers >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Some minor things are left to be done: >>>>>> - release AR2 in JIRA and give it the name "2.2.0". >>>>>> - change the version property in common.xml to "2.2.0" in the AR2 >>> >>> branch, >>>>>> >>>>>> rebuild the AR2 branch and publish the artifacts as the official 2.2.0 >>>>>> release. >>>>>> - change the version property in common.xml to the next target version >>> >>> in >>>>>> >>>>>> trunk and highlight it is under development (2.2.1-SNAPSHOT?) >>>>>> >>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>> Jonathan >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > >
