All, Paulo and I worked on this a while ago. PP did most of the work, I just helped with a few sticky parts. My opinion is that we don't not yet have the IDEAL maven separation. However this is because the project it self is not modularized well yet. I think moving to maven is a great idea because it makes us start to think about the modules and what should be separated. As we start to move towards separated client / server module, reusable API's etc, having maven will be very useful.
PP, I am more than willing to lend a hand again. Being familiar with how we did this, I still would be more than happy to commit the final code. ~Michael On 5/31/13 3:17 PM, "Angus Turner" <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi Paulo, >I want to thank you for all your hard work on getting this done. Once >you've gotten all the changes synced up, it'd be good to get a diff on >reviewboard so comments can be made. Obviously this is too late for our >first release, but it'd be great to get it ready for next release. > >Anything that makes the codebase easier to understand and follow is a big >+1 from me > >Thanks >Angus Turner >[email protected] > > >On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 8:50 PM, Paulo Pires <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Page where Maven module structure is discussed can be found at >> https://github.com/pires/wave/wiki/WiaB-Maven-Module-Organization >> >> On May 31, 2013, at 9:18 AM, Paulo Pires <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Hi all, >> > >> > Right now, I have this https://github.com/pires/wave >> > >> > I'll be merging latest changes during the day, but this is enough for >> you to fiddle with. >> > >> > Also, I had only one issue with JDK7, that I eventually fixed in >> >>https://github.com/pires/wave/commit/34e44e1dfb0ac6e7820f4d4b71fe05837efe >>d960 >> > >> > Cheers, >> > PP >> > >> > On May 30, 2013, at 7:12 PM, Dave <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> On 30/05/13 18:45, Michael MacFadden wrote: >> >>> If we have some interests, I would be more than happy to re-engage >> with PP >> >>> and get that maven transition done. While it's not a huge step I >> think it >> >>> will entice developers. >> >> >> >> My experience has been that Maven can be a bit of a Marmite >>transition >> - some people love it, some people hate it. Personally, I'm quite fond >>of >> Maven, but I've certainly never been put off using or contributing to a >> project because it uses ant. >> >> >> >> However clearer structure & modularising the codebase is something >>that >> I'm sure everyone would support, whatever build framework we use. With >>our >> limited resources, would it be wise to focus on these initially? >> >> >> >> I don't really have a say in the matter, but while I'd be quite happy >> to see a transition to Maven, I'm not sure it's a particularly pressing >> issue for the project at the moment. Sort of organising the deckchairs >>on >> the titanic? ;-) >> >> >> >> >> >> Dave >> > >> >>
