On Sat, 2006-12-30 at 02:27 +0100, Dennis Lundberg wrote: > Hi all > > I've spent some time going over the pom.xml file and using Maven 2 to > build all the jars. These jars were then compared to the ones created > with the ant build. Here's a rundown on the differences I found: > > 1. The M2 jars is missing parts of the manifest. > > As you might have seen in the commits I have now added the missing > manifest parts to the jars.
Yep, thanks! > > 2. The manifests have a couple of other lines that are different. Where > ant has: > > Ant-Version: Apache Ant 1.6.5 > Created-By: 1.4.2_13-b06 (Sun Microsystems Inc.) > > M2 has: > > Archiver-Version: Plexus Archiver > Created-By: Apache Maven > Built-By: dlg01 > Build-Jdk: 1.4.2_13 > > This has to do with what program is used to create the jar, and doesn't > seem that important. Agreed. > > 3. The class files in the test jars are different. > > It turned out that the ant build does not set source.version and > target.version when compiling the test classes. After adding that to the > ant build, the class files are equal. > > Should I commit my patched build.xml file? Yes. > > 4. The M2 jars has the files pom.properties and pom.xml in the > /META_INF/maven/commons-logging/commons-logging/ directory. > > > To summarize: I feel confident that the jars produced by Maven 2 are > equivalent to the ones produced by Ant. So Maven 2 could be used to > produce the jars for the next release of commons-logging. That's great. > > > Still to check: > > A. The site. To enable the M2 site build all it takes is a > src/site/site.xml file and to bump the version of commons-parent to > 2-SNAPSHOT. I have these changes made locally. Commons-skin is not > perfect yet, but it's getting there. It shouldn't be that long. I'm > still trying to solve Phil's rendering problem. > > Should I commit the site.xml file? Yes please. I guess this would mean that a logging release is now blocked on a commons-parent 2.0 release, but that seems ok to me. At least now we can switch to maven2 for nightlies and get the user community testing what is pretty close to a release candidate.. > > B. Distributions. As far as I can see we need to have source and binary > distros as well. I'll have a look at producing these with M2 as well. > That would be cool. Having a -src jarfile for the next JCL release would be great. Cheers, Simon --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
