On Feb 3, 2004, at 9:43 AM, Mark R. Diggory wrote:
> Brent Redeker wrote:
>> On Feb 3, 2004, at 6:54 AM, Mark R. Diggory wrote:
>>>
>>> Here,here! I recommend using the maven generated, ant build.xml over
>>> the maven project.xml for developer building and testing. This then
>>> requires no dependencies on parent project.xml and it runs
>>> independently in just about any IDE. I reserve my own usage of Maven
>>> more for building site/releases, in which case you do need the
>>> dependency on the parent project.xml.
>> I think this is a good suggestion. While I was setting myself up to
>> be able to read/compile the sources, I really had little need to use
>> Maven - build.xml is enough to compile and test the math project (and
>> I assume Maven uses this as part of the process in creating a jar).
>> Still, from what I can see, Maven might have uses for things other
>> than just creating the web site and release builds. It downloads
>> correct versions of all dependency jars, saving a little bit of work.
>> Also, I imagine that if somebody makes documentation changes, they
>> would need to do a 'maven site:generate' to see what the changes
>> actually will look like.
>
> Yes, this is correct, But, at least in the math xdocs, I've provided
> an xsl stylesheet that mimics the xdoc transform so that you can
> loosely see what the contents will look like when generated (or at
> least verify that the xml file is valid. Try looking at any of the
> math/xdocs in Mozilla or I.E. you should see what I mean then.
Hmmm... learn something new every day, I guess. I hadn't tried looking
at the xdocs in a browser yet.
> The build.xml file in math is actually generated by calling "maven
> ant" which creates the build.xml (with the same dependencies as would
> ahve been resolved by maven itself. Maven doesn't actually use this
> build.xml file after this point though. So Mavne and build.xml will
> both generate approvximately the same jar contents, but any
> customization to the maven jar goals (via pre/postGoals in the
> maven.xml) will result in contents being different in the long run.
In light of this, would it be useful for developers to be using Maven
as well - in case an updated project.xml generates a changed build.xml?
Or is the build.xml file always updated in CVS if the project.xml file
is? (In other words, would a developer ever _need_ to run Maven to have
the latest Ant build file, or is the latest build.xml in CVS always
current with project.xml?)
>> But for people who want to use Maven (for some reason or other),
>> there could be instructions that say exactly which files/directories
>> need to be checked out from jakarta-commons in addition to the
>> jakarta-commons/math module.
>
> Yes, sensible. Ultimately I wish that the gloabal project contents
> were not housed in the jakarta-commons root directory, but in another
> "subproject" directory, then the two projects could be checked out in
> the same directory (eclipse workspace for instance) and easily built
> without having to get all the other commons projects. This would be
> something to bring up to everyone on the developers list. Then all
> project.xml would do something like
>
> <extend>../site/project.xml</extend>
>
> All that wold be required to checkout and build any project would be:
>
> cvs checkout site
>
> cvs checkout math
>
> This would also keep all the site dependencies well organized would it
> not?
That's a great idea; it makes complete sense to me. This would still
preserve consistency among Commons projects, while making the necessary
steps to check out a single sub-project a little more concise. Probably
a much better idea in the long run than just maintaining a special
project.xml file without the parent directory dependencies.
Brent Redeker
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
|