tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Costin Manolache" <cos...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Mavenizing Tomcat : Was: Osgifing Tomcat
Date Thu, 01 May 2008 01:06:33 GMT
On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 5:32 PM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists <devlists@hanik.com>
wrote:

> Costin Manolache wrote:
>
> > Aren't we in 'comit then review' mode for the trunk ?
> >
> > My understanding was that RTC is in effect for the stable releases, but
> > not
> > the trunk,
> > and if there is no controversy ( and so far I think the only major
> > issues
> > was 'don't touch file structure or break ant' ) - he can just submit.
> >
> >
> if that was the case, the old trunk would have never been moved to
> sandbox,
> that trunk was moved to sandbox based on code that never got a veto, -1.


I'm confused - there is a tomcat6/trunk repo - isn't this the trunk ?

I know there are different things in sandbox - and that's all fine for
things that are bigger
or controversial changes - but not sure how a project can work without a
trunk ( unless
tomcat is dead and moved to maintainance only - but I don't remember that
announcement )



> I think the group has been careful lately, and always discussing changes
> to a consensus even before committing to trunk to avoid conflicts like that
> last one, which got quite ugly, even though it was just following CTR.



Well, it is common sense to discuss changes that affect core functionality
before committing, and I think we ( and any other
reasonably active project ) had plenty of conflicts and debates.

I remember a vote to do RTC for stable - and I think it passed, but I don't
remember any "remove the trunk"
or "RTC on the trunk". If it happened - maybe it's time to have another
discussion and reopen the trunk for CTR
and active development.

While most of tomcat works 'well enough', I think there is enough interest
in making tomcat more modular -
and I'm planning to propose some sandbox->trunk moves as well.





>
> in terms of the maven stuff, I don't fully believe that it is non
> intrusive yet. if it means adding poms everywhere in our java source code
> directory structure, i would consider that intrusive.


I would agree - I think what Henri is doing is create a build/maven
directory with poms under it.





>
>  Sorry, I haven't been paying attention to all the rule changes - if
> > someone
> > could
> > post the short version, I'm quite interested - I plan to re-start
> > contributing few things and it
> > would be good to know the process.
> >
> >
> consensus is always good to have, dont think we have fully recovered from
> the last episode yet to the point where we can just CTR anything


Sure - but that doesn't mean every small change needs to follow a formal
process and vote. It's still an open source project
that's supposed to be fun :-).

Costin



>
>
> and listen to me, I was the one that marked revolutionary :)
>
>
> Filip
>
>  Costin
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists <
> > devlists@hanik.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Costin Manolache wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists <
> > > > devlists@hanik.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Costin Manolache wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > We already have eclipse files checked in AFAIK - that counts
as
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > second
> > > > > > build system.
> > > > > > We used to have makefiles too, also in parallel with  ant (in
> > > > > > 3.0
> > > > > > times).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The goal IMO is that people who like to type mvn can do it -
> > > > > > without
> > > > > > any
> > > > > > guarantee that
> > > > > > the result will be identical with the official release or will
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > maintained
> > > > > > long term, just like
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > isn't that the culprit, including a feature under the pretenses
> > > > > that
> > > > > it
> > > > > wont be maintained?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > I meant 'maintained' in the apache-sense, of having 3 +1, etc. (
> > > > which
> > > > AFAIK
> > > > is required  for
> > > > something to be 'officially' released ).
> > > >
> > > > I'm sure Henri will maintain it  - and at some point it may even
> > > > have
> > > > the 3
> > > > +1s. As long as there is
> > > > no technical reason for a veto ( besides the 'don't break existing
> > > > build' -
> > > > which I think he addressed ),
> > > > I don't see how to stop him.  I don't like Maven  -  but  I think
> > > >  as
> > > > long
> > > > as it  doesn't break anything
> > > > Henri is perfectly entitled to work on this.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > absolutely correct, and it should follow the guidelines of voting just
> > > like everything else
> > > 1+ means I support and intend to help
> > > if you just support it, but are not planning on doing the work, then
> > > the
> > > vote is +0 :)
> > >
> > > Henri is more than welcome to make the proposal, no one is stopping
> > > him
> > > from doing so.
> > >
> > > Filip
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Costin
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Filip
> > > > >
> > > > >  the eclipse project can run but it's quite different from the
> > > > > official
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > build.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If it's making easier for some people to build tomcat - and
it
> > > > > > doesn't
> > > > > > affect people who use
> > > > > > ant in any way - what's the harm ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Costin
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 2:23 AM, Remy Maucherat <remm@apache.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 22:28 -0400, Yoav Shapira wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:09 PM, Remy Maucherat <
> > > > > > > > remm@apache.org>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >  The current build scripts are fully tested and work
well.
> > > > > > > > Adding
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >  additional methods of building or replacing
these scripts
> > > > > > > > > altogether
> > > > > > > > >  would only provide ways to create and/or release
broken
> > > > > > > > > binaries.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Again, no one is saying anything about touching the
current
> > > > > > > > build
> > > > > > > > scripts, build process, release process, or source
> > > > > > > > structure.
> > > > > > > >  All
> > > > > > > > those remain the same.  The job of the release manager
> > > > > > > > remains
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > same.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This is just an alternative for those people who want
to use
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > slightly easier / user-friendlier build system.  We
could do
> > > > > > > > worse
> > > > > > > > than lowering the barrier to entry for new contributors.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You mean you type "mvn" instead of "ant" ? I agree te keys
are
> > > > > > > closer
> > > > > > > together on my keyboard, so it could indeed be easier.
> > > > > > > Personally,
> > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > did
> > > > > > > have a first hand experience with Maven, and I think it's
> > > > > > > horrible
> > > > > > > (you
> > > > > > > have no clue what it is doing, error reporting is bad,
and
> > > > > > > basically,
> > > > > > > you have to think and act the tool's way).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I disagree with having two separate build systems, there's
no
> > > > > > > guarantee
> > > > > > > of equivalence.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Rémy
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
> > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > > > > > > Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database:
> > > > > > > 269.23.6/1404 -
> > > > > > > Release Date: 4/29/2008 6:27 PM
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
>
>
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message