commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Juozas Baliuka <bali...@mwm.lt>
Subject Re: unmavenising Commons projects
Date Mon, 24 Jun 2002 14:29:55 GMT

Yes,
I know all problems, I know "solutions" it is because the are "old problems".
I don't want make users  to solve "new problems", like download some new 
tool, setup it, read documentation, subscribe
to new mailing list if it doe's not helps ... .
I believe we will stop this thread some day :). It is kind of "new problems".

At 00:25 2002.06.25 +1000, dion@multitask.com.au wrote:
>You're kidding, right?
>
>To 'run tests' you have to download junit's jar and place it in Ant's lib.
>To produce docs, you usually need to download anakia or an XSLT engine and
>place it in Ant's lib.
>
>Under the current system these steps are all manual.
>
>Using some commons projects, e.g. Latka before I started using maven with
>it, meant download six or seven jars MANUALLY and updating a local
>properties file by copying a sample, all before compilation could start.
>This is a lot harder than just asking maven to do it automatically after
>it's installed.
>
>I agree with your goals, but the existing systems are more broken than you
>describe.
>--
>dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
>Work:      http://www.multitask.com.au
>Developers: http://adslgateway.multitask.com.au/developers
>
>Juozas Baliuka <baliuka@mwm.lt> wrote on 06/24/2002 11:51:19 PM:
>
> >
> > Yes,
> >   it is good to have common process to build commons,
> > I prefer minimalism for building,
> > it is very good  to have tools for site generation and dependency
>download,
> > but they must not be a dependency  to build "jar" or to run tests.
> > Users and contributors must be able to build code and to run tests as
> > trivial as possible.
> >
> > At 08:16 2002.06.24 -0500, Michael A. Smith wrote:
> > >On 24 Jun 2002, John Keyes wrote:
> > > > Folks the discussion here should not be about what GUMP is or
> > > > what Maven is.  It should be about standardizing the build
> > > > process for Commons.
> > >
> > >Hmmm...  Maybe I should have been paying more attention to this thread.
> > >I didn't realize there was talk about standardizing build process for
> > >all of commons.
> > >
> > > > It seems that the general consensus is that to satisfy all
> > > > parties there should be two ant projects, build.xml and
> > > > build-maven.xml.  Could this issue be resolved with just one
> > > > project, build.xml.
> > > >
> > > > The default target for this project must generate the binary
> > > > distribution.  If the default target is 'dist' then both scenarios
> > > > could be accomodated as follows:
> > >
> > >I'm not so sure about tha.  Currently, collections has the tests run as
> > >the default project (compiling anything as necessary).  I feel it's a
> > >good thing to have the full test suite run by default, and I wouldn't
> > >want that to change
> > >
> > > > <target name="dist" depends="ant-dist, maven-dist"/>
> > > >
> > > > <target name="ant-dist" unless="maven.home">
> > > >   ...
> > > > </target>
> > > >
> > > > <target name="maven-dist" if="maven.home">
> > > >   ...
> > > > </target>
> > >
> > >regards,
> > >michael
> > >
> > >
> > >--
> > >To unsubscribe, e-mail:
><mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> > >For additional commands, e-mail:
><mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
><mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
><mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
> >
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
>For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>



--
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