commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "James Strachan" <>
Subject Re: unmavenising Commons projects
Date Tue, 25 Jun 2002 10:11:24 GMT
From: "Geir Magnusson Jr." <>
> On 6/25/02 2:44 AM, "James Strachan" <> wrote:
> > From: "Geir Magnusson Jr." <>
> >> On 6/24/02 4:18 PM, "James Strachan" <>
> >>
> >>> From: "Henri Yandell" <>
> >>>> So, will anyone notice if I go and rollback all the projects which
> >>>> been mavenised and are not new projects, then supply a parallel
> >>>> build-maven.xml which is the new version?
> >>>
> >>> I wouldn't bother just now; with Maven b5, which is just around the
> > corder,
> >>> we'll be autogenerating a build.xml which will run perfectly well in
> > inside
> >>> Ant for those who want to stick with Ant as well as from inside Gump
> > too.
> >>> Then I think Costin's reservations will no longer be issues. The old
> >>> build*.xml files that contained maven related stuff can then be
> > and
> >>> any callback code or extra targets will move to the new maven.xml
> >>
> >> How do people customize their build.xml?
> >
> > Customizations, like pre/post conditions, new dependencies, new targets
> > even redefinitions of exisitng targets are all going to go in the
> > which uses the same syntax as Ant.
> >
> > Though the maven.xml will actuallly be a Jelly script, so as well as
> > traditional Ant syntax it can also support Velocity-like (Jexl)
> > for accessing the Maven Project Object Model (POM), XPath can be used if
> > need be along with decent expression & looping & file walking support
and a
> > more powerful goal orientated library called Werkz for doing more
> > per/post action/goal and prerequisite stuff.. It should avoid those
> > Ant-callbacks that are in Maven b4.
> >
> James, if this computer thing doesn't work out for you, consider
> :)


> What I was getting at is *replacing* their actual build.xml with a maven
> generated one sounds like a bad idea at first in that it would rekindle
> hard feelings of getting toes stepped on by the Maven Borg.

If developers want to keep their hand-crafted build.xml's thats fine too.
Its gonna be an *option* to auto-generate the build.xml from Maven's
project.xml, only if developers *want* to.

If non-mavenized projects want to move to Maven they can happily support
both hand crafted build.xml and Maven's project.xml side by side. Then if
they think its a good idea, they can switch to autogenerating the build.xml
to avoid the unnecessary maintenance to keep up with the latest and greatest
Ant tips, tricks and conventions.

> Aside from that, would be a great feature to auto-gen an ant script...



Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free address at

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message