felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Lenzi <kis...@interfree.it>
Subject Re: Adding hierarchies to the Maven build
Date Sat, 31 Mar 2007 08:53:23 GMT
Richard S. Hall wrote:
> Carlos Sanchez wrote:
>> Have you guys thought about making the build more hierarchical, adding
>> more parent poms and grouping the projects to share configuration
> This is basically what I was trying to describe in my other message 
> where I talk about our waffling between flat versus hierarchical. Since 
> flat hasn't seemed to work out too well, I am willing to give a more 
> hierarchical approach a try.
> However, I still feel that trunk/ should contain sub-projects. Some 
> sub-projects may contain multiple parts, e.g., iPOJO, MOSGi, UPnP, etc. 
> So those can be grouped, but I do not think we should try to define some 
> ontological grouping hierarchical, like tools, plugins, etc. This gets 
> too confusing, e.g., iPOJO has a plugin, which could go into plugins or 
> tools, but it is really part of the iPOJO sub-project.
> Thus, my suggestion would be trunk/ being the flat set of sub-projects, 
> where each sub-project can be comprised of one ore more modules to allow 
> for additional grouping.
> The question is whether or not we should try to formally decide this 
> (i.e., a vote) or just do it.
> -> richard
>> for instance, instead of
>> ipojo
>> ipojo.arch
>> ipojo.metadata
>> ipojo.plugin
>> ipojo/pom.xml (modules: ipojo, arch, metadata, plugin, version= 0.7.0 )
>> ipojo/ipojo (usually core or some other name)
>> ipojo/arch
>> ipojo/metadata
>> ipojo/plugin
>> all the ipojo subprojects would extend ipojo/pom.xml that in turn
>> extends the parent felix pom, you could share some info in
>> ipojo/pom.xml
>> that way you reduce the modules in felix parent to ipojo, 
>> plugins,mosgi,...
>> and you wouldn't need different profiles, just go into one of the
>> folders and mvn install, eg. go to plugins to build all plugins
>> from my experience i think it would make more sense and ends being
>> easier to mantain
I like the idea too ^_^, but I think it should be documented 
somewhere... maybe we can update the readme.txt file that is quit old 

Finally, if I understood well the future SVN repository will look 
somehow like that:
   |-> utility
          |--> ipojo
   |-> core-bundle
   |-> compendium-bundle
   	   |----------> upnp
                          |-> basedriver
                                   |---> examples
Am I right?

Stefano "Kismet" Lenzi

View raw message