directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Emmanuel Lecharny" <elecha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [ApacheDS] Problems building the installers
Date Tue, 22 May 2007 14:46:00 GMT
Guys,

I have cleant up the shared sub-project so that each dependency is used with
its correct version (version will be declared for each plugin), and each
maven-plugin has been declared with its version too.

I have modified some more things too:
- as shared depends on a parent project (the 1.0.7-SNAPSHOT), there is a
problem if you want to build shared alone while you don't have any jars in
your .m2/repository. So I removed the reference to the TLP pom.xml in the
shared pom.xml. As the TLP pom.xml stilll contains shared as a module, this
is not a big deal. However, doing that, I also had to move the junit
dependency from TLP pom.xml to shared pom.xml
- I removed all the report from shared/convert, ldap and ldap-constants.
They are useless atm
- I also upgraded all the dependencies and plugin to their latest version
(antlr 2.7.7, etc)

I think that the TLP pom.xml should not contain any information about
dependencies and plugins, as it is just a global start. If you want to be
able to build shared, or daemon, or apacheds, standalone, you must not
depend on this TLP pom, IMHO.

We should also try to use always the same version of each plugin and
dependency, which is quite a PITA to do, as we use around 70 of them in our
40 subprojects... What I have done for shared should be done for apacheds
and daemon, and it takes a hell of time !



On 5/21/07, Alex Karasulu < akarasulu@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Ahhh ok well then we may just need to remove the snapshot plugin repos and
> figure out a workaround
> for anything we have in our build that may need them legitimately.
>
> Alex
>
> On 5/21/07, Chris Custine <chris.custine@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > No, I totally understand.  I just have a bit of a personal thing about
> > using the maven snapshot repo for plugins because of the general craziness
> > that results once in a while (like what was happening with Stefan this
> > weekend).  I think versioning the plugins will help for out project, but
> > everyone has to realize that this can affect other projects as well, because
> > once the SNAPSHOT plugin is downloaded to the local repo, any other project
> > will use that one too even if they didn't ask for the snapshot repo for
> > plugins.  This is my main compaint with using snapshot repo for plugins.
> >
> > CC
> >
> >
> >
> > On 5/21/07, Alex Karasulu < akarasulu@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > BTW Chris I may be completely over doing it with the need to support a
> > > partial build.  I just have
> > > had users complain about it when they checked out just an apacheds
> > > branch and tried to compile.
> > >
> > > However this may be a bit too much perhaps.
> > >
> > > Alex
> > >
> > > On 5/21/07, Chris Custine < chris.custine@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 5/21/07, Alex Karasulu <akarasulu@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 5/21/07, Chris Custine < chris.custine@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > OK, I pretty much figured that this was the case.  I think the
> > > > > > main problem is the plugins.  I have noticed that when I use
the snapshots
> > > > > > repo for plugins, even the basic maven functionality plugins
get pulled down
> > > > > > as SNAPSHOT once in a while (recently I noticed surefire and
even compiler
> > > > > > get pulled as snapshots), so to limit the versions we would
have to list
> > > > > > specific versions of even the core plugins.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Yeah I've noticed the exact same thing.  We just need a definitive
> > > > > list of all the plugins with their versions in the pluginManagement
section
> > > > > without presuming anything from now on.   I think we might be able
to get a
> > > > > good list like this from the Geronimo peeps which manage plugins
very
> > > > > carefully in a pluginManagement section.  I think we might be able
to get
> > > > > these straight from their master pom.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is the only reason for the snapshot plugins because of the
> > > > > > daemon-plugin?  If so, we could disable the plugins snapshot
repo and just
> > > > > > document that if you want to build the installers from SVN code,
then you
> > > > > > must build daemon-plugin first or something similar to that
effect....
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hmmmm ok you're talking about the snapshot-plugin repos.  I
> > > > > thought that you meant the snapshot repos in general.  Now that I
got my
> > > > > head straight I think we could use older versions of the daemon plugin.
 Now
> > > > > we also have the partition plugin for the bootstrap schema partition's
> > > > > creation which adds some more complexity.  I guess we could disable
all
> > > > > snapshot plugin repos but just keep the Apache snapshot repo?  Would
this
> > > > > still pull down maven snapshots since they also share this repo?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The plugin versions are managed totally seperate from the dependency
> > > > artifacts, so  even if you have the snapshot repo enabled for dependencies
> > > > it wouldn't be considered for plugins unless it was listed in
> > > > pluginRepositories section.
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps with explicit version locking we could reduce this problem
> > > > > but if it persists then we can just exclude all snapshot repos and
find
> > > > > another workaround.   WDYT?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yeah, that will work...  I always thought it was a given that if you
> > > > are building from SVN you probably need to checkout and build the top
level
> > > > project and I never considered supporting partial checkout builds.
> > > >
> > > > Alex
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Chris
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


-- 
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel L├ęcharny
www.iktek.com

Mime
View raw message