river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Closing out release 2.2.0
Date Thu, 26 Aug 2010 01:13:00 GMT
Here we have a minor dilemma. I might count as a qualified person, but
I'm a bit swamped and there is some feeling that mentoring and
developering should be distinct. Maybe I'll have a look and see what I
see.

On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 8:48 PM, Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> wrote:
> Is there any chance that we could borrow an Ant-to-Maven expert to do the
> conversion, either now or at some later time? Presumably, there are people
> working on other projects who have already done this a time or two.
>
> The River build looks too complicated to me to be a good choice for anyone's
> first Maven project, but maintaining the Maven build once it is working
> would presumably be significantly easier. The Ant-to-Maven expert would not
> need to make a long term commitment to River.
>
> Patricia
>
>
> On 8/25/2010 5:10 PM, Jonathan Costers wrote:
>>
>> I think the main issue is that none of us are experts in Maven.
>> The River project is quite complex and wouldn't directly fit into the
>> standard Maven paradigms.
>>
>> some examples:
>> - packaging our artificacts (using classdep)
>> - dependency management (using Class-Path in manifests, -dl dependencies)
>> - running our test suites from a Maven build
>>
>> I think it would certainly be possible to overcome these hurdles, and if I
>> had more time to spend I would certainly take a closer look.
>> Up until now however, since we have a basic build working (with Ant,
>> unfortunately) and have the contributed test harness integrated in that,
>> focus has been on increasing test coverage by enabling more tests.
>>
>> Enabling these contributed tests is important because they were previously
>> used by Sun for QA and regression testing their Jini distributions.
>> Every day we can't run all of these tests is a risk that bugs are
>> (re)introduced without notice (in fact, it already happened).
>>
>> 2010/8/26 Benson Margulies<bimargulies@gmail.com>
>>
>>> I haven't looked at the River build. Does it have a lot of intricate
>>> antification that's hard to map?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Jonathan Costers
>>> <jonathan.costers@googlemail.com>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> very true ... if we would be able to switch to a Maven build, many
>>>
>>> headaches
>>>>
>>>> would be avoided.
>>>>
>>>> the switching itself is not as easy as it may seem though ...
>>>>
>>>> 2010/8/26 Benson Margulies<bimargulies@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>> Well, you could switch to a maven build and let the release plugin
>>>>> worry about this.
>>>>>
>>>>> *** humorous intrusion ***
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Jonathan Costers
>>>>> <jonathan.costers@googlemail.com>  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some minor things are left to be done:
>>>>>> - release AR2 in JIRA and give it the name "2.2.0".
>>>>>> - change the version property in common.xml to "2.2.0" in the AR2
>>>
>>> branch,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> rebuild the AR2 branch and publish the artifacts as the official
2.2.0
>>>>>> release.
>>>>>> - change the version property in common.xml to the next target version
>>>
>>> in
>>>>>>
>>>>>> trunk and highlight it is under development (2.2.1-SNAPSHOT?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>> Jonathan
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

Mime
View raw message