On 5/2/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/2/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 4/30/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Excellent thanks, thats type type feedback I was looking for! Comments > in > > line... > > > > On 4/30/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > <snip/> > > > > I have a few questions and suggestions. > > > - tuscany-sca.jar contains .svn directories, I guess they should be > > > removed from the JAR. > > > > > > I can't see these, i could just be blind or maybe its something > different > > about our environments could you give an example of what the file names > > are? > > > > - Also 2 empty xsds at the root of the JAR and com.example packages, > > > they must be coming from one of the examples? > > > > > > The com.example.* files are coming from the databinding-jaxb and > > databinding-sdo modules, we need to fix those modules but I'm not sure > > how. > > It looks like the jaxb and sdo plugins need to some way to say they're > > test > > resources. Any one know how to fix this? > > > > I can't see the 2 empty xsds, something different about our environments > > again? > > > > - I guess we're going to rename this to sca-1.0-beta1-incubating? > > > > > > Yes, the name should be being picked up from the pom, but i'll test it > > does > > change. (Using the current format the name would be 1.0-incubating-beta1 > , > > do > > we really want 1.0-beta1-incubating?) > > > > - Like you said above, we'll have to include the javadoc for our SPIs. > > > > > > Yes, I guess I can add that in now even though the SPIs aren't done by > > just > > including the tuscany-core-spi module javadoc. Is javadoc for just these > > two > > modules enough (sca-api and core-spi). I've added this now, are there > > other > > modules we want javadoc for? > > > > - How did you produce the single META-INF/services/...ModuleActivator > > > file? is it generated? > > > > > > This is done in the java/sca/distribution/bundle project using the Maven > > Shade plugin, see in the pom.xml the shade config where a Shade > > AppendingTransformer is used to merge all the ModuleActivator files into > > one. No doc at all about the Shade plugin that I could find, I got this > > from > > looking at the CXF build and the Shade plugin source code. > > > > > > > - We have two different servlet-api JARs, should we pick one? > > > > > > Fixed. The 6.0.10 one was coming from the http-tomcat module so i've > added > > exclusions in that pom.xml. > > > > - Could we have, in the bin distro, a tuscany-sca-src.jar containing all > > > the source code for the classes in tuscany-sca.jar? > > > > > > Thats a good idea, I'm not sure how though. The tuscany-sca.jar is built > > from all the <dependency> elements listed in the > > distribution/bundle/pom.xml, I could make a src jar by just zipping up > > everything in sca/modules but it may end up including more than is in > the > > tuscany-sca.jar. Anyone have any better ideas on how to do this? > > > > - How about renaming tuscany-sca.jar to tuscany-sca-all.jar, or any name > > > indicating that it's all the tuscany code? > > > > > > OK, done. > > > > - The NOTICE will have to be updated as it contains obsolete > dependencies. > > > > > > Yep. Over the next days I'll trawl through all the license and notice > > files > > to make sure they're correct. > > > > - I think it would be great to have Ant build scripts for some of the > > > samples, as not everybody is using Maven. > > > > > > Me too, I'll try to get one going today. Should we have all the samples > > have > > both maven and Ant build scripts, or just Ant, or some samples have Ant > > and > > others have Maven? > > > > - Pre-built sample JARs would be great too, but not as important if we > > > have a simple Ant build for the samples. > > > > > > There are pre-built sample jars in the sample target directory, eg, > > samples\calculator\target\tuscany- > > sample-calculator-1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT.jar > > > > I've updated the distribution build scripts with the above changes now. > > > > ...ant > > > Hi I just this minute took a fresh update of sca to make ant scripts for > the > samples. I have some questions... > > - why does tuscany-sca-manifest.jar not have a version number? > - What is intention of tuscany-sca-all.... I need a classpath with all > tuscany jars on. Currently its in tuscany-sca-manifest but it doesn't pick > up the dependencies in the modules directory as they are in ../modules The idea is that tuscany-sca-manifest.jar is an easy way for users to be able to add tuscany-sca and all the dependencies to their classpath when they have the binary distribution. It only works when its in the same directory as all the other jars so its not distributed out side of the binary distro so i don't think it needs "-incubating-" in the name, and because its not distributed separately i left off a version number, not sure if thats good or not but it does make the name nice and short.
Ok, fair point. The tuscany-sca-all-1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT.jar is made from combining all
the tuscany-sca modules into a single jar. It would get published to the maven repository so needs "-incubating-" and a version number in the name. The idea for this jar is that while its good to have lots of individual modules for Tuscany developers as that prevents code tangles but that actually makes things harder for users as they have dozens of jars to worry about. This is a first attempt at the -all- jar which just incudes _everything_, we may end up wanting different versions for different environments.
Sounds like a good idea to me. A question about the state of the build today (I appreciate this is just a point in time so not giving you a hard time). When I run the distribution build I get a bin zip where 1. tuscany-sca-all-1.0-incubation-SNAPSHOT.jar is in the lib dir 2. It doesn't appear to have any useful content (maybe I'm looking at it the wrong way) 3. tuscany-sca-manifest.jar has all of the tuscany libs referenced in its manifest but of course they are not in the lib dir so I can;t make use of that list Happy to help trying to make this work but I don't know whether its a product of my environment or whether this just isn't done yet. This is just a strawman distro, so there's going to be mistakes and better
ways of doing things so please do suggest improvements :) There's a couple of threads discussing the pros and cons of various approaches at [1] and [2]. - tuscany-rmi? Should this be a binding Yes, would be better as tuscany-binding-rmi. I've checked in a build.xml to the calculator sample that I'm playing with > (I took it from M2). But thinking about this if we go with ant builds for > this release it would be good if they work for the binary release and the > src release. Even if its just the "run" target. So how to we construct the > classpath to make this work. I'm just building th src distro to see if it > creats a lib dir but we could do with something like tuscan-sca-manifest > to > keep the ant script simple. I think the Ant scripts should definitely work in the binary distro by using the jars in the lib directory, but thats not going to work in the src distro. Maybe we could just say the Ant scripts don't work in the src distro, and there you have to use mvn?
Mmm. Ok we could. I'll let this one sink in a bit and play with it to see if it make sense. I would like to have a consistent way of running the samples regardless of how they are build so that's why I'm not sure. As I'm looking at the calculator sample I'm updating the readme.html. I plan
> to reinstate sca/doc/css if no one has any objections. Or we could go back to simple text files for the readme's?
Ok, can do. I guess it makes them more generally accessible. I can change to readme.txt Regards
> > Simon > ...ant [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-cxf-user/200703.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] [2] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-cxf-dev/200610.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
