On 10/26/2010 17:27, Thilo Götz wrote:
> On 10/26/2010 17:14, Marshall Schor wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/26/2010 8:02 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
So, well, this isn't quite correct. Things placed here get copied into
the t
On 10/26/2010 17:14, Marshall Schor wrote:
>
>
> On 10/26/2010 8:02 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>>> So, well, this isn't quite correct. Things placed here get copied into the
>>> top
>>> of the top project, not the top level of t
On 10/26/2010 8:02 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>> So, well, this isn't quite correct. Things placed here get copied into the
>> top
>> of the top project, not the top level of the archive.
> Couldn't the top project simply be at the
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
> So, well, this isn't quite correct. Things placed here get copied into the
> top
> of the top project, not the top level of the archive.
Couldn't the top project simply be at the top level? Then this
wouldn't be a problem. Convention
On 10/25/2010 2:06 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>
> On 10/22/2010 3:21 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 7:44 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
We could copy the build tooling stuff into each project we release (say,
the
uimaj SDK, the uima-as add-on, and our A
On 10/22/2010 3:21 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 7:44 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>>> We could copy the build tooling stuff into each project we release (say, the
>>> uimaj SDK, the uima-as add-on, and our Add-ons). Then each would be
>>> independent. But we woul
> On 10/22/2010 19:15, Marshall Schor wrote:
>>> On 10/22/2010 18:06, Marshall Schor wrote:
> On 10/22/2010 17:02, Marshall Schor wrote:
> [...]
Note also that you don't need to fiddle before building - this is more
like a
one-time setup that tells your maven installation that i
On 10/22/2010 19:15, Marshall Schor wrote:
On 10/22/2010 18:06, Marshall Schor wrote:
On 10/22/2010 17:02, Marshall Schor wrote:
[...]
Note also that you don't need to fiddle before building - this is more like a
one-time setup that tells your maven installation that it can reference the
Apach
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 7:44 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>> We could copy the build tooling stuff into each project we release (say, the
>> uimaj SDK, the uima-as add-on, and our Add-ons). Then each would be
>> independent. But we would have 3 (maybe more) copies of common build
>> tool
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 7:44 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
> We could copy the build tooling stuff into each project we release (say, the
> uimaj SDK, the uima-as add-on, and our Add-ons). Then each would be
> independent. But we would have 3 (maybe more) copies of common build tooling
> to
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>> So, for instance, there is a docbook parent pom - it adds stuff needed for
>> processing docbooks.
> The functionality seems to be included in an automatically enabled
> profile. That could just as well go to the top-level POM, as
> On 10/22/2010 18:06, Marshall Schor wrote:
>>> On 10/22/2010 17:02, Marshall Schor wrote:
Hi -
Let's do some debugging...
On 10/22/2010 9:44 AM, Thilo Götz wrote:
> I got the "build" projects from svn. There are no build
> instructions in there, so I cd
On 10/22/2010 18:06, Marshall Schor wrote:
>> On 10/22/2010 17:02, Marshall Schor wrote:
>>> Hi -
>>>
>>> Let's do some debugging...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/22/2010 9:44 AM, Thilo Götz wrote:
I got the "build" projects from svn. There are no build
instructions in there, so I cd'ed to each
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
> So, for instance, there is a docbook parent pom - it adds stuff needed for
> processing docbooks.
The functionality seems to be included in an automatically enabled
profile. That could just as well go to the top-level POM, as it
doesn'
> On 10/22/2010 17:02, Marshall Schor wrote:
>> Hi -
>>
>> Let's do some debugging...
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/22/2010 9:44 AM, Thilo Götz wrote:
>>> I got the "build" projects from svn. There are no build
>>> instructions in there, so I cd'ed to each subdir and did
>>> a mvn install. Some of those dirs
On 10/22/2010 17:02, Marshall Schor wrote:
> Hi -
>
> Let's do some debugging...
>
>
>
> On 10/22/2010 9:44 AM, Thilo Götz wrote:
>> I got the "build" projects from svn. There are no build
>> instructions in there, so I cd'ed to each subdir and did
>> a mvn install. Some of those dirs contain
Hi, Jukka,
It's really great to get some experienced person review of what we're doing
here, and your comments are most appreciated!
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>> The advantage, I think, of this approach is that the UIMA distribution
>> without
>> the build
Hi -
Let's do some debugging...
On 10/22/2010 9:44 AM, Thilo Götz wrote:
> I got the "build" projects from svn. There are no build
> instructions in there, so I cd'ed to each subdir and did
> a mvn install. Some of those dirs contain various poms,
> and I'm obviously not supposed to mvn insta
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
> The advantage, I think, of this approach is that the UIMA distribution without
> the build tooling is buildable from source using just the one mvn install;
> Maven
> obtains the build tooling needed from maven central, via Maven's remo
On 10/22/2010 15:07, Marshall Schor wrote:
On 10/22/2010 8:40 AM, Thilo Götz wrote:
On 10/22/2010 14:02, Marshall Schor wrote:
On 10/21/2010 12:26 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 4:22 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
So, I'm thinking 3b) is the way to go. Other opinions?
I
On 10/22/2010 8:40 AM, Thilo Götz wrote:
> On 10/22/2010 14:02, Marshall Schor wrote:
>>
>> On 10/21/2010 12:26 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 4:22 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
So, I'm thinking 3b) is the way to go. Other opinions?
>>> I don't quite understand
On 10/22/2010 14:02, Marshall Schor wrote:
>
>
> On 10/21/2010 12:26 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 4:22 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>>> So, I'm thinking 3b) is the way to go. Other opinions?
>> I don't quite understand where all this complexity comes from.
>>
>> Th
On 10/21/2010 12:26 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 4:22 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>> So, I'm thinking 3b) is the way to go. Other opinions?
> I don't quite understand where all this complexity comes from.
>
> The only thing you need for a release is a source archive
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 4:22 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
> So, I'm thinking 3b) is the way to go. Other opinions?
I don't quite understand where all this complexity comes from.
The only thing you need for a release is a source archive with
instructions on how to build it. If the release buil
Each "release" of the build tooling takes time and effort, from several people,
for doing the release, preparing test versions of our code referring to the new
release, and testing the build tooling, and then doing an svn "merge" of the
updated parent-pom references to pick up the new versions, ba
25 matches
Mail list logo
