cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <Ralph.Go...@dslextreme.com>
Subject Re: [2.2] Past, present and future of the maven build
Date Tue, 30 Aug 2005 22:49:12 GMT
Joerg,

I'm not sure whether you're serious or just joking.  I'm not suggesting 
anyone do anything with regard to what is going on in migrating to Maven 
2, especially since I haven't begun to look at the improvements that 
have been made to Maven.  However, I'm not sure how any tool could 
behave differently. Anytime you don't compile all the code at once these 
sorts of problems will occur.  For example, if Block A has an import to 
a class in Block B and Block B imports a class in Block A one of these 
will fail to compile unless they are both compiled together which, of 
course, you don't want to do if they are truly independent blocks.

Ralph

Joerg Heinicke wrote:

> On 30.08.2005 17:31, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
>> A word of caution. One thing we ran into with Maven 1 was that we 
>> ended up splitting individual components into 3 parts; api, impl and 
>> test.  As you start moving from one monolithic project into smaller 
>> subcomponents which are compiled separately you will soon find that 
>> you have circularity problems. The only good way to solve this is to 
>> use lots of interfaces.  To some degree we already see this today 
>> where we have blocks depending on each other. Test is split off 
>> because very often the runtime dependencies are different than the 
>> compile-time dependencies.   In addition, the Cocoon samples often 
>> introduce dependencies that the core code of the project or even the 
>> test cases don't need.
>>
>> So to summarize, I would suggest that it would be a good idea for 
>> each "component" - be it core or a block - to have api, impl, test 
>> and samples projects.
>
>
> Did I mention that I hate tools needing changes in the subject they 
> should work on to make them work? The above scenario and the other 
> mentioned necessary restructurings were the reason why I ever were 
> against a change of the build system to Maven.
>
> Ok, we really have a problem with our current build system. Nobody (me 
> included) started with another solution like Ant 1.6 or similar. The 
> Maven fraction started now to address the problem and I'm ok with it. 
> The above rant probably just shows I'm a smart-ass ;-)
>
> Joerg



Mime
View raw message