roller-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave <snoopd...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Another idea
Date Tue, 25 Mar 2008 20:43:06 GMT
I was very reluctant to switch to Maven, especially when Allen was
away and could not comment.I definitely like the idea of smaller SVN
size (i.e. no jars), auto-generating IDE project files and the Maven
support in Netbeans looks pretty nice.

I'm willing to reconsider now, since there is so much interest and
since Jencks and Raible have considerable Maven experience and could
help us along. Perhaps we could try Maven and Ant side-by-side for a
while until we are comfortable, I think that's what Abdera is doing?

- Dave



On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 12:51 PM, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>  On Mar 25, 2008, at 6:51 AM, Pavel Konnikov wrote:
>
>  > On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 10:30:44 +0300, Kirill Kosinov
>  > <kirill.kosinov@gmail.com> wrote:
>  >
>  >> Good day.
>  >>
>  >> Unfortunately i didn't receive any reply to my previous post, so i
>  >> may conclude
>  >> that previous idea is uninteresting. So i decided to propose
>  >> another one.
>  >> When i downloaded sources of roller i saw that building and
>  >> configuring of project is not very comfortable.
>  >> I think that storing jar's in svn looks not good.
>  >> Today many apache projects use maven for building, and i wonder
>  >> why roller doesn't?
>  >> I used appfuse and the way in which maven is used there looks great.
>  >> So i propose to improve roller build scripts. If this idea is not
>  >> enough for gsoc,
>  >> it may be only my issue to roller's community.
>  >>
>  > Imho, migration roller to maven2 is cool idea!
>  > Maven2 for java projects is standart de facto.
>
>  See https://issues.apache.org/roller/browse/ROL-1537
>
>  Although the main developers don't seem inclined to consider maven,
>  IIUC they have shown more willingness to consider use of ivy to get
>  jars from a maven repo and restructuring the directory layout to
>  provide a slight correspondence between the project structure and the
>  artifacts it produces.
>
>  Ivy shouldn't be too hard to introduce by means of patches.
>  Rearranging stuff is a bit harder to do unless you are a committer.
>  I guess you could supply a script full of "svn mv A B" that a
>  committer could run.
>
>  It's possible that if the project structure got disentangled so it
>  had the same form as a maven project the comparative simplicity of
>  maven configuration over ant scripts would become sufficiently
>  evident that the main developers would reconsider the use of maven.
>
>  thanks
>  david jencks
>
>  >
>  > --
>  > Best regards. Pavel Konnikov
>
>

Mime
View raw message