openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Patrick Linskey" <plins...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Packaging with maven
Date Mon, 07 May 2007 16:35:30 GMT
> directory, since I don't think Maven much cares what the name of the
> directory in which the parent module resides (I doubt it even ever
> looks at it). I.e., it would be located at http://svn.apache.org/

I think you're probably right -- currently, the dir is named 'trunk',
for example.

> looks at it). I.e., it would be located at http://svn.apache.org/
> repos/asf/openjpa/trunk/openjpa/openjpa.

Isn't that one too many 'openjpa' tokens? Couldn't it just be
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/trunk/openjpa, instead of
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/trunk/openjpa-all?

-Patrick

On 5/7/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mprudhom@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Patrick raises a good point. Also, we might also be able to just have
> the "openjpa" aggregate jar module be in a sub-directory named
> "openjpa" without having to rename the parent module's enclosing
> directory, since I don't think Maven much cares what the name of the
> directory in which the parent module resides (I doubt it even ever
> looks at it). I.e., it would be located at http://svn.apache.org/
> repos/asf/openjpa/trunk/openjpa/openjpa.
>
> How does that sound?
>
>
>
> On May 7, 2007, at 9:15 AM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
>
> > I think it makes sense to rename dirs as appropriate. Remember that
> > once we graduate, we'll be moving repositories anyways, so it would
> > seem like a good opportunity to make structural changes.
> >
> > -Patrick
> >
> > On 5/7/07, Michael Dick <michael.d.dick@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> +1
> >>
> >> What would the impact be if we renamed openjpa-all to openjpa?
> >>
> >> We could change our checkout instructions to read
> >> svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/openjpa/
> >> trunkopenjpa-parent
> >> and then the directories match the artifactId's in pom.xml.
> >>
> >> The only reason I think this is worth doing is to avoid confusion
> >> for new
> >> developers down the road. It's just one more thing that we have to
> >> remember
> >> and explain. Maybe there's an impact to changing the directory
> >> name that I
> >> missed though.
> >>
> >> -Mike
> >>
> >> On 5/6/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mprudhom@apache.org > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Poking around the ActiveMQ pom.xml files, I notice that you can
> >> have
> >> > a different artifactId than the module name (i.e., directory)
> >> you are
> >> > in. I hadn't known you could do this.
> >> >
> >> > Currently, our artifacts name are:
> >> >
> >> >    trunk/pom.xml: openjpa
> >> >    trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa-all
> >> >    trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: openjpa-project
> >> >
> >> > We could change these to:
> >> >
> >> >    trunk/pom.xml: openjpa-parent
> >> >    trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa
> >> >    trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: apache-openjpa
> >> >
> >> > I've tested this out, and it results in the openjpa aggregate jar
> >> > being named "openjpa-VERSION.jar", the dependency being simply
> >> named
> >> > "openjpa", and the assembly is named "apache-openjpa-VERSION.zip ".
> >> > None of the directories needed to be renamed. I've attached the
> >> patch
> >> > that does this to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-194
> >> >
> >> > Since this will mess up people who currently have maven
> >> dependencies
> >> > on OpenJPA (i.e., people who depend on "openjpa-all" will now
> >> need to
> >> > depend on "openjpa"), we should probably get this hammered out
> >> before
> >> > leaving incubation. So I've gone ahead and turned the [DISCUSS]
> >> into
> >> > a [VOTE] to see if we should go ahead and do this.
> >> >
> >> > A vote of +1 means we should do the renaming, -1 means we should
> >> not,
> >> > and 0 means "don't care". The vote will remain open until Wednesday
> >> > May 9th at 23:59 GMT.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On May 4, 2007, at 6:55 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Some comments below
> >> > >
> >> > > On 5/4/07, Craig L Russell <Craig.Russell@sun.com > wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> I'd like reopen the discussion on how to package and name our
> >> > >> artifacts. I think the current setup could be improved, to
> >> give a
> >> > >> better experience for users who might not be using maven for
> >> > >> dependency management. It's easy for us to change now before
> >> > >> graduation because once we graduate, people will need to
> >> update their
> >> > >> dependencies anyway so there are no backward compatibility
> >> issues.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> The name of the single jar that has all of the openjpa stuff
> >> in it
> >> > >> except for the documentation and examples is currently called
> >> > >> openjpa-
> >> > >> all. This name is confusing because unless they RTFM, people
> >> don't
> >> > >> really know that it's not all the code you need, just all the
> >> jpa
> >> > >> code. So I'd like to call this artifact openjpa.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > +1
> >> > >
> >> > > But we already have a project with that name, and that project
> >> builds
> >> > >> the distributions. So I'd rename the current openjpa to
> >> openjpa-dist.
> >> > >> Its ultimate destination in the Apache mirror structure is under
> >> > >> www.apache.org/dist/openjpa once we graduate, so having dist
> >> in the
> >> > >> project name helps understanding that this project builds the
> >> > >> artifacts that go into dist. Separate from the artifacts that
> >> are
> >> > >> published via maven.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > +1
> >> > >
> >> > > Finally, the openjpa-all jar includes its subcomponents as
> >> > >> dependencies. I think this is wrong, since you end up with a
> >> class
> >> > >> path with openjpa-all.jar as well as openjpa-kernel.jar and
> >> all the
> >> > >> others.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > I would like to change this too. I did a little experimenting and
> >> > > it looks
> >> > > like the dependencies aren't needed in openjpa-all, but they are
> >> > > needed for
> >> > > openjpa-project (to populate the lib directory). Moving the
> >> > > dependencies
> >> > > into openjpa-project should be safe.
> >> > >
> >> > > We're also going to need to change the deploy logic to strip
> >> out the
> >> > > -project suffix from the zip files. We've talked about it before
> >> > > when I was
> >> > > releasing 0.9.7 (and before that when Marc was working on 0.9.6),
> >> > > but I
> >> > > haven't had time to look into it. It should be fairly easy to
> >> make the
> >> > > change.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Thoughts?
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Craig
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Craig Russell
> >> > >> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/
> >> products/
> >> > >> jdo
> >> > >> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> >> > >> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > > -Michael Dick
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Patrick Linskey
> > 202 669 5907
>
>


-- 
Patrick Linskey
202 669 5907

Mime
View raw message