felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carsten Ziegeler <cziege...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Next release of the Felix parent pom [1.1.0]
Date Sat, 18 Apr 2009 18:02:01 GMT
Stuart McCulloch schrieb:
> 2009/4/18 Felix Meschberger <fmeschbe@gmail.com>
>> Hi,
>> Clement Escoffier schrieb:
>>> Hi,
>>> On 18.04.2009, at 11:41, Felix Meschberger wrote:
>>>> Hi Stuart,
>>>> Stuart McCulloch schrieb:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> I'd like to stage a new release of our parent pom (ie. pom/pom.xml) -
>>>>> this
>>>>> will exercise the new release process.
>>>>> Are there any objections to starting this? Does anyone have any
>>>>> changes they
>>>>> would like to make to this pom?
>>>>> Note that this isn't a vote on the actual release - I will start that
>>>>> once
>>>>> I've staged it using Nexus.
>>>>> Also please hold off from any new releases until I've tried out the new
>>>>> process and documented it on the wiki :)
>>>> Can we split the parent pom (definitions pertaining to all Felix
>>>> projects) and reactor (<modules> section) functionalities into into
>>>> files by that matter ?
>>>> We could for example create a reactor project at trunk, which stays at
>>>> SNAPSHOT version for ever and which we can update as we see fit to
>>>> accomodate new child projects.
>>>> The actual parent pom would remain where it was and would be updated and
>>>> released for release new general setup such as the deployment
>>>> configuration.
>>>> In addition it is IMO also a matter of separation of concerns (reactor
>>>> vs. general setup). We have done this in the Sling and Jackrabbit
>>>> projects with much success (IMHO).
>>> I agree having two files:
>>> - one with the reactor configuration and
>>> - one with the release / project configuration
>>> sounds good.
>>> Projects should inherit of the release / project configuration pom file.
>>> However, aren't we already in this mode ? Recently, I saw a pom file in
>>> the Felix root (the reactor one ?) and one in the pom folder.
>> I was confused by this file, too.
>> But the actual reactor is in the pom/pom.xml file.
> That's not quite right - Carsten created a top-level pom with a copy of the
> reactor and left
> the old modules definition in the parent pom. 
Argh, that was an oversight then :( Sorry, I forgot to commit my local
copy of the parent pom :(

Carsten Ziegeler

View raw message