commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "James Strachan" <james_strac...@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject Re: unmavenising Commons projects
Date Tue, 25 Jun 2002 10:11:24 GMT
From: "Geir Magnusson Jr." <geirm@adeptra.com>
> On 6/25/02 2:44 AM, "James Strachan" <james_strachan@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > From: "Geir Magnusson Jr." <geirm@adeptra.com>
> >> On 6/24/02 4:18 PM, "James Strachan" <james_strachan@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
> >>
> >>> From: "Henri Yandell" <bayard@generationjava.com>
> >>>> So, will anyone notice if I go and rollback all the projects which
have
> >>>> 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
trashed
> > and
> >>> any callback code or extra targets will move to the new maven.xml
file.
> >>
> >> How do people customize their build.xml?
> >
> > Customizations, like pre/post conditions, new dependencies, new targets
or
> > even redefinitions of exisitng targets are all going to go in the
maven.xml
> > 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)
expressions
> > 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
powerful
> > per/post action/goal and prerequisite stuff.. It should avoid those
hacky
> > Ant-callbacks that are in Maven b4.
> >
>
> James, if this computer thing doesn't work out for you, consider
marketing.
>
> :)

:-)

> 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
the
> 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...

Cool.

James


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com


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


Mime
View raw message