geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Genender <jgenen...@savoirtech.com>
Subject Re: progress on mavenizing eclipse plugins
Date Mon, 29 Aug 2005 14:16:17 GMT


Sachin Patel wrote:
> I totally agree that downloading 2 build tools for end users is bad.  
> However, for this particular case I don't think doing this is AS bad.  
>  From a users standpoint, there going to just download the built image 
> from the site and install it onto eclipse.  From a developers 
> standpoint, regardless of wether this is built using M1 or M2, most 
> eclipse end users are most likely not going to build with either of 
> them, and they will just do what is familiar for them and import the 
> projects into an Eclipse IDE and build from within there.
> If you still feel strongly against it, I don't mind going back to M1.

I definately don't want to be the party pooper here ;-)  But I think we 
need to stay the course of consistency.  Lets get some feedback of 
others and then we can come to some concensus on this issue.  I do feel 
strongly about this, but its the decision of the team, so lets get some 
more feedback.  This will be a real PITA if we need to do this with 2 
build tools.  Also, I am fine if you want to do it in both M1 and M2, so 
this would suffice.  But I really think you need to support M1 right now.

Again, if we can get a roll out schedule with getting Geronimo 
converted, then I would be ok with M2.

Jeff

> 
> Jeff Genender wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> Sachin Patel wrote:
>>
>>> So after sitting down yesterday and doing a little reading... I have 
>>> a much better understanding of Maven. :) I've decided to go with 
>>> using M2, one of the reasons which I'm probably going to end up 
>>> having to write a plugin and want to avoid massive jelly scripts. :)
>>
>>
>> Hang on there...
>>
>> Although I like your enthusiasm regarding M2, and I personally can't 
>> wait to start converting over to M2, we really need to keep the 
>> thoughts of the end users in our development.  To have to download 2 
>> build tools in order build all of Geronimo, IMHO, is very bad.  I hope 
>> that you rethink this and do it in M1.  We are here to help you in 
>> getting your project up and running.  There is nothing you cannot do 
>> in M1...
>>
>> If we have a rollout schedule for moving Geronimo to M2, then I would 
>> be open to this.  But unfortunately its not officially on the radar.  
>> I would only ask that we are consistent in the build tool selection.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>>
>>> M1 provided a convenient jar override feature where I could the 
>>> specify the explicit path to dependencies outside of the repo.  This 
>>> makes things easier as I can just point to the 
>>> ${eclipse-home}/plugins/blah.jar.  Unfortunately M2 doesn't have 
>>> this.  So after talking to some of the very helpful Maven folks, the 
>>> only current way to do this is to have the eclipse jars inside the 
>>> local repo.  To make it even more painful, from looks of things I 
>>> don't think I can just can't download an eclipse image, and do a 
>>> "select-all" and copy in the all jars.  It looks like I'm going to 
>>> have to create the "maven convention" path for each jar.
>>>
>>> So from an Eclipse install, for each plugin I would need to copy and 
>>> rename the jar from
>>>
>>> ${eclipse-install}/eclipse/plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources_3.1.0.jar
>>>
>>> to...
>>>
>>> ${local_repo}/eclipse-plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources/3.1.0/org.eclipse.core.resources-3.1.0.jar

>>>
>>>
>>> I'm still having issues though as even when I try to build offline it 
>>> is attempting to download from the remote repo the dependency's .pom, 
>>> and thus the build fails.  Sent a note on the Maven dev list for a 
>>> solution to prevent it from doing this and look directly in the local 
>>> repo.
>>>
>>> Thanks and will give an update when I make further progress.
>>>
>>> Sachin.
>>>
>>>
>>

Mime
View raw message