tuscany-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: 2.0 Beta2 samples (was: [VOTE] Release Tuscany SCA 2.0 Beta2 RC2)
Date Fri, 11 Feb 2011 10:17:28 GMT
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Simon Nash <nash@apache.org> wrote:
> ant elder wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Florian Moga <moga.flo@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not keen into having an ant build file in every sample. If someone
>>> wants
>>> to use ant, shouldn't they download all dependencies manually? Won't they
>>> use maven for that task anyway? What about ivy?
>>>
>>
>> I've been thinking the same thing lately, especially now that you
>> pointed out that we can do "mvn ant:ant" to have Ant scripts
>> automatically generated. Instead of Ant builds for each sample there
>> could just be some doc in the top level samples folder or README that
>> describes how to use "mvn ant:ant".
>>
>> The build scripts generated with mvn ant:ant download all the
>> dependencies from the Maven repositories, that does mean that not much
>> would be actually using all the jars from the Tuscany binary
>> distribution so we might want to consider what all thats really for.
>>
>>   ...ant
>>
>>
> Actually I would wonder what is the point of using maven to generate
> an ant script that does exactly the same as the maven build.
>
> In 1.x the ant scripts were provided as an alternative to maven that
> use local artifacts from the binary distro instead of depending on
> remote repositories.  Another purpose was to make it very clear and
> explicit what steps are involved "under the covers" to build and run
> Tuscany applications.  This information is useful to people who want
> to develop solutions that embed Tuscany.
>
>  Simon
>
>

In 1.x at least some of the Ant scripts are/were just generated from
the maven build but using the Tuscany plugin instead of the Ant plugin
aren't they, so its not so different?

I think we need to agree what the purpose of them is, what it is that
they're demonstrating, and then decide if the best way to show that is
a separate sample(s), or to include both Maven and Ant in every
sample, I'm wondering if separate might be better.

One think is that the 2.x distribution is a bit unusual with the way
it stores the jars in both top and subdirectories, and there are now
all the generated manifest jars, and the various aggregated jars. I
can't imagine anyone would have their own jars in this sort of mix so
i wonder how useful the hand written Ant builds which use them really
would be.

   ...ant

Mime
View raw message