geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dain Sundstrom <d...@iq80.com>
Subject Re: progress on mavenizing eclipse plugins
Date Mon, 29 Aug 2005 18:13:42 GMT
I'm with david on this.

Normally, I would encourage Sachin to use m1, but the eclipse build  
depends on having transitive dependencies and m1 doesn't have them.   
I think having an m2 build is better then having no build, which is  
what I think we would get with m1.

-dain


On Aug 29, 2005, at 8:20 AM, 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