avalon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <pe...@realityforge.org>
Subject Re: cvs commit: jakarta-avalon/src/proposal/avalon5 discussion-points.txt
Date Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:13:41 GMT
On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 04:16, bloritsch@apache.org wrote:
>   ----------------------------------------------------
>
>   Topic: Should we incorporate Commons Logging?
>   Explanation:
>       This move would increase synergy with other
>       projects and reduce the amount of code that we
>       need to maintain.  The issue was raised by Mauro
>       Telivi, and we need further	communication to
>       figure out what is the best solution.
>   PRO:
>   CON:

Nah. For the sharing of one interface it does not seem useful to couple the 
projects. Commons also passes down objects which is not a great idea as it 
means that you are binding to specific subsystems if you use that "feature".

>   Topic: Should we use Maven for the build?
>   Explanation:
>       Our current build architecture is chaotic to say
>       the least.  We have no less than three methods
>       of generating documentation, and serveral fairly
>       complex build scripts.  Maven helps smooth out
>       the inconsistencies in the approach, and still
>       allows for plugging in a documentation building
>       tool like Fortress.  Most importantly, it will
>       get rid of many JAR files in our CVS directory,
>       and simplify the build process for our users.
>   PRO:
>       bloritsch - We are in desparate need of a unified
>           and simple build architecture.  IMO, Maven is
>           the best choice we have available.

I am using maven to build the site for all the stuff I am moving out of 
Avalon. It is absolutely fantastic. There is a few hickups and it is 
definetly still alpha quality but it is better than what we have now. The 
great thing about it is that a lot of people have already done all the 
integration work and it is easy enough to get coverage, junit etc all 
integrated in.

>   CON:

The negatives;
 - speed (not a great problem in CVS version because of "console" plugin)
 - project inheritance is not fully done so we have to copy a 3 line property 
file around when we are using - however this is supposed to be fixed before 
next release
 - inheritance of maven.xmls is not possibel as far as I know so you can end 
up copying some around. Not sure if this will be fixed .. but will become 
irrelevent if next point picked up ...
 - painful to manage your own plugins if not in maven CVS. I believe this will 
hopefully be fixed sometime in the future ... maybe :)

I am using their last release and it seems to work well. However it may be 
best to wait till next release before converting Avalon (Just to avoid a few 
bugs that the last Maven has). However I suggest we keep our current ant 
build system around until Maven gets the ability to easily install plugins on 
per project basis at which point we can dump our exisitng build system.

>   --------------------------------------------------
>
>   Topic: Should we unify the CVS structures?
>   Explanation:
>       We currently have ~9 CVS structures.  The purpose
>       was to separate the different projects and make
>       it very clear what code belongs to which project.
>       That project also helps us identify areas of tight
>       coupling and what projects depend on which other
>       projects.  That can still be done in one CVS
>       structure, using directories to distinguish the
>       projects.
>   PRO:
>       bloritsch - We have some projects that are no
>           longer supported or needed (like Testlet).
>           It would be a good way to clean out the cruft,
>           and help manage the focus and scope of Avalon.

Maybe we should wait for subversion (subversion.tigris.org) - it looks like a 
much better tool and if we go to that we can do the big re-arrange then. 

>   --------------------------------------------------
>
>   Topic: Should we make the Avalon maling lists from
>          avalon.apache.org?
>   Explanation:
>       We are currently our own entity.  We are not
>       a Jakarta project any more.  I would suggest
>       the mailing lists (in addition to
>       pmc@avalon.apache.org): developers@, users@,
>   	cvs@, and possibly general@ and announce@.
>   PRO:
>       bloritsch - It would help establish the
>           Avalon brand instead of Jakarta.

+1

>   Topic: Should we use our avalon.apache.org site?
>   Explanation:
>       Whether we asked for it or not, the site does
>       exist, but it is currently empty.  We should
>       put our current stuff in the new location, and
>       use redirects to point us all to the new
>       location.  It would also enable us to make
>       sure we have mirror friendly distributions.
>   PRO:
>       bloritsch - Again we are solidifying Avalon.

+1

Though personally I would prefer that our website removed some of the crap 
that it has about.

-- 
Cheers,

Peter Donald
*------------------------------------------------*
| Trying is the first step to failure.           |
|   So never try, Lisa  - Homer Jay Simpson      |
*------------------------------------------------* 


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message