geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From anita kulshreshtha <a_kuls...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Maven2 Conversation Status
Date Wed, 19 Jul 2006 13:53:28 GMT
inline..

--- Jason Dillon <jason@planet57.com> wrote:

> Good news... we are almost there.  Bad news... it will probably take 
> 
> another week or so get everything *fully* functional.
> 
> Right now we have a functional Jetty J2EE assembly, which almost all 
> 
> components enabled.  Tomcat J2EE assembly is complaining still, but  
> my hunch is that the fix is relatively simple... for someone who  
> knows better than I.  The minimal assemblies are in close seconds,  
> and should be easy to get functional once the J2EE assemblies are  
> finished.
> 
> As many of you have noticed I have been working out of the sandbox/ 
> svkmerge/m2migration branch for this work.  I've been tracking  
> changes made to trunk and merging them periodically to my sandbox so 
> 
> that m2migration is kept up to date wrt to other changes.  I think  
> that this could start to get out of hand the longer that this work is
>  
> kept separate.  Already I've had to merge a few changes that would  
> not be needed if we had one tree to work from.
> 
> It is my opinion that we should probably start the RTC process now  
> for merging the svkmerge/m2migration branch to trunk and to deprecate
>  
> the Maven 1 build... and nuke its build files.

   Is this necessary? It is a nice thing to have during bug fixes.

> 
> I believe that the m2 build is functional enough for people to work  
> with for bug fixes and other changes going into trunk.  I also  
> believe that the longer we keep m1 and m2 files around the more work 
> 
> it will be for use to keep them in sync with each other.
> 
> My recommendation is that we:
> 
>   * RTC vote genesis to be a peer-project to trunk
>   * RTC vote the m2migration branch to be merged back to trunk
> 
> I would prefer to finish up the work on trunk, but I am fine to merge
>  
> back to trunk a working m2 build and then continue on the m2migration
>  
> for another week or so to bunch up changes into per-week intervals  
> for RTC merge-back to trunk (this is not ideal, but will work if that
>  
> is what is required to get it done).
> 
> IMO it is better to get trunk sync'd up with the new m2 work that has
>  
> been done so that when others change configuration that it will get  
> applied to the new build and not get lost in the transition.

I am planning to maintain the packaging plugin and configs on the trunk
despite all the cosmetic changes done by RTC-2161. I still need to add
some functionality and tie some loose ends. I need to add classPath fix
and explicit-version.properties fix. Jason, Do I have your permission
to do so?
We should submit 3 patches for RTC - 
1. One from the branch
2. One with packaging plugin and configs made from the trunk
3. One with assembly plugin and Assemblies made from the trunk
    The patches 2 and 3 can be reviewed and tested independently of 1.
   IMO this is the only way to keep the build current at all times
while we wait for RTC and other issues to be resolved.
    What do PMC members who will be reviewing this work feel about this
approach?

> 
> I am confident that we can get the m2 build finished in the next few 
> 
> weeks... pending the time required to RTC.

    Things do not always go as planned. I had planned to have all the
servers running on the trunk before I left for my vacation.

Thanks
Anita

> 
> Can we get some commitment from PMC members to review and vote in  
> these changes so that we can finally finish the move to Maven 2?
> 
> Please let me know what your opinion is.
> 
> We are almost there... let's finish the job.
> 
> --jason
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Mime
View raw message