incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ewan Mellor <Ewan.Mel...@eu.citrix.com>
Subject RE: [DISCUSS] Binaries (jars) in our source tree/source releases.
Date Tue, 14 Aug 2012 00:37:49 GMT
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Darren Shepherd [mailto:darren@godaddy.com]
>
> [Snip]
> 
> Let me know if you want me to head down this path. It would probably just
> take me a week or two to knock this out and then you guys can decide if this
> is a 4.0 or post-4.0 thing. One huge warning up front though. Maven is a build
> by convention framework and kinda likes it if you actually use its
> conventions. This means the directory structure of all the of the java stuff will
> be moved around. One could make maven respect the existing layout, but
> your doing yourself and future developers a disservice if your using maven
> and not following the conventions.

It's this "use our conventions" bit that worries people, I think.  The CloudStack conventions
certainly aren't Maven-friendly, and it would be a lot of churn on the codebase and arguably
a backwards step if we were to adopt all their conventions.  Do you know if Gradle suffers
from the same problem?  In other words, if we switched to Gradle would we still have to move
all the code around?

Also, could you explain why you think that a switch to Maven would be easy but a switch to
Gradle would be hard?

In general, I'm happy to take build system changes pretty much right up to the last minute.
  Any regressions are likely to be immediate and obvious, unless the more subtle regressions
you get when working with the code itself.  I'm also keen to make sure that build from source
is easy for people, since this will be the primary release mechanism now.  However, if we're
going to have to move all the files around, we'll never be able to manage the release branch
properly, so that would rule this out for 4.0 if that's going to be necessary.

Cheers,

Ewan.

Mime
View raw message