commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dennis Lundberg <>
Subject Re: [all] Maven, help or hinderance?
Date Sun, 18 Dec 2005 19:58:01 GMT
James Carman wrote:
> Well, I think it's pretty obvious that we need to start a new maven plugin
> project for commons.  So, why don't we just get started?  Do we have to vote
> on something like that?  Are we going to make it a Maven2 or Maven1 plugin?

This is something that we need to decide before we get started. The 
plugin architecture is quite different between maven 1 and 2.

> Do we want to make everyone upgrade their POMs?  Where will the code for the
> plugin live?  
> One a side note, why isn't there an XSLT stylesheet for translating old POMs
> to new ones?  You'd think that'd be pretty easy to do to at least get one
> that runs in Maven2.  Anyway, that's just my rant from my experience trying
> to Maven2-ize commons-proxy at one time.  Now, back to our normally
> scheduled programming. :-)

There is work being done on some sort of conversion utility over in 
maven land.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: robert burrell donkin [] 
> Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 4:52 AM
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [all] Maven, help or hinderance?
> On Sat, 2005-12-17 at 01:16 -0500, Henri Yandell wrote:
>> I just got coding on Commons stuff again after a bit of an absence.
>> UGH! I don't mean to diss the good work that people have put in on
>> adapting maven to fit what we want, but given that I use maven daily
>> at work and with osjava hacking, it's amazing how complex this seems.
>> As I said, it's not the fault of those making the impossible possible,
>> rather I think it's that we need to give up some of our desires and
>> simplify our usage of Maven.  ie) our very specific needs need to be
>> challenged and made to justify themselves.
>> Maybe I'm being a bit harsh :)
> i think that there are two different kinds of specific need here. IMO
> both are not negotiable (for different reasons).
> the ASF has a few specific needs which maven either does not provide at
> the moment (for example, NOTICE.xml) or which maven should not provide
> since they are too specific to the ASF (for example, the symlink build
> structure). these needs are non-negotiable. 
> i think that these needs are best satisfied by the creation of a jakarta
> or apache plug-in as suggested by brett. 
> there are another set of needs which fall under best practise. over the
> last year (or two), the commons has started to come under intense
> scrutiny. we are now the establishment and any times that we fall short
> of the highest standards, we can expect to be held up as examples of bad
> practise throughout the java community. i agree with stephen that our
> releases now need to be of the highest possible standard. i'm no longer
> to willing to accept lower quality releases as a result of using maven.
> so again, these are not negotiable.
> in the past, we haven't been very effective (as we might) at feeding
> through these emerging best practises to maven. it's pretty much been
> only phil. i'm going to try to be more active (and hope others will do
> the same). however, it is clear that one problem we have is that the
> feedback cycle is too inefficient: we can't afford to wait a month or
> two for new plugin releases and we're finding it hard to ensure everyone
> has the required versions. perhaps managing our plugin would made this
> easier.
> - robert
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Dennis Lundberg

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

View raw message