geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sachin Patel <sppat...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: progress on mavenizing eclipse plugins
Date Mon, 29 Aug 2005 15:54:18 GMT
Correction: ${m1-repo}/group/jars/artifact-1.0.jar

Sachin Patel wrote:
> Yes, pretty sure.  The layout of the m1 vs m2 repositories is 
> different.  In m1 you would have
>
> ${m1-repo}/group/artifact-1.0.jar
> ${m1-repo}/group/artifact-2.0.jar
>
> The poms would be under ${m1-repo}/group/poms/
>
> Where in 2.0 it installs them as ...
>
> ${m1-repo}/group/artifact/1.0/artifact-1.0.jar
> ${m1-repo}/group/artifact/2.0/artifact-2.0.jar
>
> And it installs the pom in the individual folder containing each jar.
>
> David Jencks wrote:
>> well, I disagree....
>>
>> I think an appropriate strategy is to get the build working with m2,  
>> including writing the maven plugin you will need, and then call that  
>> maven plugin from m1 to create an m1 build.  If we are really lucky 
>> the  geronimo m2 build will be far enough along by the time sachin 
>> gets the  m2 maven plugin working properly that he won't have to deal 
>> with m1:-)   I also think an example of using m2 in our very own 
>> build may help to  encourage us all to pitch in on the geronimo m2 
>> build.
>>
>>
>> btw are you sure about the location of the eclipse jars in the m2  
>> repository?  I haven't used m2 at all but I wonder if the attempt to  
>> download the pom is due to it being in the wrong place.
>>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>> On Aug 29, 2005, at 7:57 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>>
>>> I think simpler is better and more consumable.  +1 to Stay with Maven 1
>>>
>>> Jeff Genender wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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