commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From d...@multitask.com.au
Subject Re: unmavenising Commons projects
Date Sun, 23 Jun 2002 02:31:04 GMT
Costin,
Maven is about more than just build files. Notice how some commons sandbox 
components now have a web site. Even commons components like dbcp took a 
long time finding the motivation to get a web site together.

Maven doesn't just do builds, it produces reports, confirms tests, can 
produce coverage reports for test cases, ensure coding styles are adhered 
to and reported on, show cvs history and activity and much more.

Given one of my pet gripes with commons and sanbox was the complete lack 
of documentation, Maven at least is a step in the right direction.

Again, how much of the existing maven process must be available in a 
vanilla ant build file?
--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
Work:      http://www.multitask.com.au
Developers: http://adslgateway.multitask.com.au/developers



costinm@covalent.net
06/23/02 07:13 AM
Please respond to "Jakarta Commons Developers List"


To
Jakarta Commons Developers List <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
cc

bcc

Subject
Re: unmavenising Commons projects



On 21 Jun 2002, Jason van Zyl wrote:

> If we are going to do that then we should also specify a standard which
> is the point of Maven: to unify the build process. Commons components

I don't think you can 'unify' the build process by forcing everyone to
use a single style and stop using 'legacy' ant. Even with all the problems
it has, gump shows very clearly that it is possible to create an unified
build process where each project can keep it's own style.

I don't think I'll use maven to build projects until it is at least
at the same level with gump. 

If you can make Maven to use the existing build.xml files ( which 
shouldn't be very difficult, if Gump can do it with shell and xslt ) - 
I'll switch to maven. If you can support the gump project descriptors,
then all jakarta will be buit with maven, and I don't think anyone
could complain.

As for 'common policy/style' for all commons packages - yes, it
would be nice, but so far we don't seem to have any agreement
on this. And that's a pretty good sign that it's the build system
that should be able to adapt, instead of forcing everyone in
jakarta to adapt to a new build system. 


This has nothing to do with the subject of this thread - which is 
the requirement to discuss and vote on major changes, like deprecating
the ant build file ( which happened in commons ). 


Costin


--
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