incubator-empire-db-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Francis De Brabandere" <franci...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Maven support for the upcoming 2.0.5 release
Date Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:14:42 GMT
Any updates on me becoming a committer?
Who is responsible for empire-db-struts2?

On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 10:38 AM, Francis De Brabandere
<francisdb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just read that incubating releases can not be uploaded to the
> central maven repository, there is a separate repository available for
> those:
> http://www.apache.org/dev/repository-faq.html
>
> Further I need to know what the real dependencies are for
> empire-db-struts2, the lib dir also contains transitive dependencies
> (dependencies of dependencies) but I should not declare those in the
> pom files.
>
> I set up a temp testing repository at maven.somatik.be
>                <repository>
>                  <id>maven.somatik.be</id>
>                  <name>Somatik Repository for Maven</name>
>                  <url>http://maven.somatik.be</url>
>                  <layout>default</layout>
>                </repository>
>
> with the following artifact available:
> <dependency>
>                <groupId>org.apache.empire</groupId>
>                <artifactId>empire-db</artifactId>
>                <version>2.0.4-incubating</version>
>        </dependency>
> (source and javadoc jar are not in there yet)
>
> Is the groupid and artifactid correct?
>
> Francis
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 8:33 PM, Rainer Döbele <doebele@esteam.de> wrote:
>> Hi Francis,
>>
>> excellent.
>> Hennig (our sponsor) has told me in the meatime how to get you on.
>> We (i.e. the existing Empire-db committers) have to vote you in.
>> Therefore we have to call for a vote and get at least three positive votes
>> (which should not be a problem).
>>
>> Jörg, you're the voting master.
>> Would you be so kind and call for a vote again concering accepting Francis
>> as our new committer?
>>
>> Concering upcoming release 2.0.5.:
>> So far, we have only a few minor bugfixes and small improvements to publish.
>> But the Maven thing would be a good reason to get a new release out.
>>
>> However publishing releases can sometimes be tedious in the incubator.
>> Once we all have accepted the release the Incubator PMC has to accept is as
>> well.
>>
>> We had to fight long and hard to get the previous release accepted due to
>> some legal concerns.
>> That should be better this time around, but you never know.
>>
>> Rainer
>>
>>
>> Francis De Brabandere wrote:
>>>
>>> I'll take care of the Contributor License Agreement this evening.
>>>
>>> > Still I plead for a smooth transition in two phases:
>>> >
>>> > Phase one: Take the current distribution
>>> > (apache-empire-db-2.0.4-incubating
>>> > and apache-empire-struts2-ext-1.0.4-incubating from
>>> > http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/empire-db) and restructure it for
>>> > Maven
>>> > in a way that it best possibly conforms to all Maven conventions. This
>>> > would
>>> > also include putting all required files into the maven repository. Next
>>> > we
>>> > will change our distribution scripts to build the distribution in that
>>> > way
>>> > for the 2.0.5 release.
>>>
>>> Uploading the current distribution to the central repo should not be a
>>> problem. I'll make the needed pom files and stuff.
>>> (http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-central-repository-upload.html)
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Phase two: Once the 2.0.5. release is out and everybody had a chance to
>>> > see
>>> > the benefits, we can restructure our internal SVN structure in the same
>>> > way.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Is the 2.0.5 release planned for the near future?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Francis
>>>
>>> > I hope this approach is feasible and if so I think it is sensible.
>>> > We should possibly consider all options and call for a vote.
>>> >
>>> > Regards
>>> > Rainer
>>> >
>>> > Francis De Brabandere wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Personally I am open for any kind of change if I can see the
>>> >>> advantage.
>>> >>> For
>>> >>> the moment however I would prefer starting with a Maven solution
for
>>> >>> the
>>> >>> users of the distribution first, and maybe later on we can change
the
>>> >>> internal project layout too.
>>> >>> What do you think?
>>> >>
>>> >> Well the problem is that just creating some pom files without changing
>>> >> the project structure would complicate the maven build a lot. As
>>> >> Martijn said, maven is all about conventions, trying to fight those
is
>>> >> looking for trouble. Maven has proven itself and is used by some of
>>> >> the biggest open source java frameworks. The advantage is that when
>>> >> you know how a maven project is structured, you feel at home in any
>>> >> maven based project out there.
>>> >>
>>> >> Users using maven for their build typically don't even care how your
>>> >> project is built or released. All they care about is that the files
>>> >> are available in the central maven repository (or some other public
>>> >> repo) and that all needed dependencies are configured correctly. For
>>> >> them the distribution you are talking about is not needed: the source,
>>> >> binaries and javadoc will be fetched during the initial build and set
>>> >> up in their ide.  The first thing I do when some of my projects need
>>> >> and extra dependency is looking it up on http://www.mvnrepository.com/
>>> >> (I even use their RSS feed to keep myself up to date on the new
>>> >> releases for java related frameworks)
>>> >>
>>> >> Maven is able to perform the task of both build files you described.
>>> >> Distribution files can be built using the assembly plugin (ex
>>> >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket/trunk/wicket-assembly-all.xml).
>>> >>
>>> >> Francis
>>> >>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.somatik.be
> Microsoft gives you windows, Linux gives you the whole house.
>



-- 
http://www.somatik.be
Microsoft gives you windows, Linux gives you the whole house.

Mime
View raw message