jakarta-cactus-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher Lenz <cml...@gmx.de>
Subject Re: Building Cactus with Maven -> I'd like to volonteer
Date Wed, 25 Jun 2003 21:33:00 GMT
Julien Dubois wrote:
> Hi everybody,

Hi Julien,

> I've done 2 maven builds files : one for the framework, and one for the whole 
> project (using the Maven Reactor).
> The one I did for the framework is running quite well, it compiles the whole 
> thing and creates a web site with lots of cool-looking reports. However I 

Would be nice if the reports also had some usefulness ;-)

> have some questions/remarks :
> - Maven does *not* understand multiple source directories. It is possible to 
> give it the root of the source directories, and then it will walk thru them 
> (nice), but in Cactus' case there are the same classes in the j2ee12 and 
> j2ee13 repositories, so I'm having some duplicate class errors. What you're 
> doing here (copy/pasting directories) is too Ant-like I'm afraid. Besides, 
> it's a really weird idea... Couldn't you put everything in the same tree, and 
> use a factory?? I understand that some parts of the j2ee 1.2 spec are 
> deprecated and outdated, but hey, there's anyway lots of old/deprecated stuff 
> in the "share" directory.
> Anyway, I don't think a Maven build can be done easily without a grand unified 
> source tree.
> BTW, my build succeeds because I wiped off the j2ee12 tree, which is useless 
> to me.

It is not easily possible to eliminate the parallel source directories 
for j2ee12/j2ee13. It's not just about deprecation, but also about new 
methods and interfaces that have been added in j2ee13.

I would assume that Maven can actually handle this, and that you've just 
not found the correct approach yet. If it can't handle this, well, ... 
ugh. Show stopper.

> - The AspectJ stuff seems to be working, but are you just using it for logging 
> the methods?? Or is there some other use i haven't found out? I'm an 
> AspectWerkz user, so I'm not AspectJ-familiar and I might not have this 
> right.

Right, AspectJ is only used for logging. I'm not particularly happy 
about that personally, but there are plans -- albeit not concrete -- to 
extend the usage of AspectJ to other areas.

> - The PMD & checkstyle reports are producing lots of errors (wrong brackets 
> and everything), but some interesting things do show up (use of Vector for 
> example)

Why would we want to run both PMD and Checkstyle? We have been running 
Checkstyle all the time, and there's a configuration file in the root 
dir (checkstyle.xml). Certainly using any kind of default configuration 
would cause a lot of violations.

> - The Clover report seems to be half broken, but I think it's the 
> maven-clover-plugin's fault. Anyway that's a non-free software, who would 
> actually use that to do some serious work :-)

IIUC, the Clover support in Maven isn't quite up to the task yet, 
because we need to generate the report after multiple test runs and 
builds of sub-projects have finished (framework, integration/ant, 
samples/servlet)... Vincent should know the details.

> - JUnit, javadoc and all the other reports I've tried were ok.
> Concerning today's emails :
> - I think the Maven-built web site can be customized. I have never done it 
> before, thus.
> - There's a maven-gump plug-in, so Gump intergration should be possible. I'm a 
> CruiseControl user, so I can't really say more about Gump.

The maven-gump plugin would only solve a tiny bit of the problem (it 
just generates the gump descriptor AFAIK). The real problem is that 
Maven needs to be bootstrappable by Gump (which I think is just noble 
theory as of yet), and the Gump must be able to execute our build, which 
doesn't currently work using a Maven-based build. All this due to 
community "incompatibility", not technical reasons. Sigh.

Christopher Lenz
/=/ cmlenz at gmx.de

View raw message