cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Unico Hommes <>
Subject Re: [Heads up] Change to build system in 2.1.x
Date Sat, 30 Oct 2004 19:24:40 GMT

On 30-okt-04, at 20:05, Unico Hommes wrote:

> On 30-okt-04, at 19:29, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>> Ugo Cei wrote:
>>> Il giorno 25/ott/04, alle 19:14, Unico Hommes ha scritto:
>>>> I've completed the changes to the build system discussed earlier 
>>>> [1]. In order to do so I have extended the gump descriptor with 
>>>> additional information that allows the build system to locate one 
>>>> or more dependency jars per <depend> project within ./lib/optional.

>>>> See for an example the cocoon-block-axis project definition in 
>>>> gump.xml
>>>> Every block now *must* declare all the dependencies it requires to 
>>>> compile in gump.xml just in order for it to build properly.
>>> Looks like this is not a backward-compatible change. Blocks which 
>>> are distributed outside of Cocoon (like Fins or my Spring Petstore) 
>>> must change their deployment instructions to add all those <depend> 
>>> elements (and put dependencies in gump too, which wasn't required 
>>> before, even though it might have been good practice).
>>> Shouldn't we make this change in trunk only and leave 2.1 as is?
>> yes, this is a pretty big obstacle for a simple bugfix release. The 
>> block build system *is* not an aPI but it's a contract and we must 
>> honor them.
> When I was working on this I didn't realize this would be an 
> incompatible change, or even that compatibility concerns also affected 
> our build system. In all fairness I think you have a good point.
> Rather than undoing all the changes (would make me really feel bad 
> about the wasted time I invested :-) I think it is no problem to 
> provide compatibility. I think that all that is needed is that 
> block/lib is added to the block compilation classpath and that those 
> libraries are also copied to WEB-INF/lib.

Not that I no longer care what you guys think ;-) but I went ahead and 
made the proposed changes. It should be compatible now.


View raw message