directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From daune...@daune-consult.com
Subject Re: [mina] Using Ant + Forrest like Tapestry team does.
Date Tue, 15 Nov 2005 08:06:31 GMT
Trustin Lee <trustin@gmail.com> a écrit :

> Hi all,
>
> I've been playing with Maven 2 and splitting MINA into multiple projects.
> But at this time, Maven 2 documentation is far from perfection, and we have
> to bother Maven team and manuals to build a satistifiable build system for
> MINA (and of course for other projects of us)

I looked at Maven 2 too, and came to the same conclusion. It is unusable until
documentation improves.

> While I'm looking for the Apache projects which uses EasyMock to clarify
> some license issue with MIT-license, I've found that Tapestry team adopted
> Ant + Forrest instead of Maven. This way has an apparent advantage for MINA:
>
> 1) We can easily package multiprojects into one tarball.
>
> 2) We can generate various versions of multiprojects; mina-all, mina-core,
> mina-ssl, ... And, we can distribute all the JARs in one tarball with no
> effort.
>
> 3) We don't need to worry about generating one site documentation for
> multiprojects such as delegating JavaDocs and other reports.
>
> 4) Forrest provides better document generation.
>
> There are some downside for it, too:
>
> 1) We cannot use Maven repository. Actually we can, but we have to assume
> that Maven Ant bridge is installed for a user's computer.
>
> 2) We cannot use Maven deployment feature.
>
> But I think this is OK because we can just use Maven-Ant bridge or JAM (
> http://www.javagen.com/jam/index.html).
>
> WDYT?
>

I think Ivy is also worth taking a look at:

http://jayasoft.org/ivy/doc/comparison

I always hear good feedback from users.

Cheers,

J-F



Mime
View raw message