I'm am new to maven, so sorry if I show my ignorance.
While I think I can see the value to what you suggest moving forward
if we choose to release sub-projects independantly (I say if because
we haven't discussed or agreed what tbd long term answer is yet) I do
not understand the benefit to a user of Aries of this change.
As a result it does not appear to me to be key to resolve prior to
release.
I would like to understand the problems you see better, but I do not
have the maven background you guys have, any chance you could explain
what the problems are, why they are problems and the solution at some
point?
Thanks
Alasdair
On 23 Feb 2010, at 18:18, David Jencks <[email protected]> wrote:
This discussion got me worried enough to take a look at the aries
build. Now I'm even more worried.
While it might feel good to try to push out a release as fast as
possible I'd prefer to see a sustainable build system in place
first. So far it looks to me as if aries is going to be a bunch of
loosely coupled subprojects. Building them all at once is not going
to work for long. I think we should recognize that and put that in
the build system now. To me this means:
1. a parent pom that isn't at the root of the svn trunk.
2. each subproject has pom info sufficient so it can be released
(mostly svn info) (right now this is completely missing everywhere
as far as I can see, which will result in ares getting tagged into
svn as part of the apache pom)
We can still have a "fake" pom that builds everything, but it won't
be part of any release procedure.
Having separately released subprojects does not prevent having a
single vote on all the releases.
I'd suggest a few other pom tweaks such as using resources and
filtered-resources to distinguish when filtering is called for.
In addition relevant to this particular bit of the thread, we need
an eba-maven-plugin to assemble ebas. Getting this into a first
release would be a great idea IMO.
If there's general agreement I can spend some time playing with the
build and possibly working on the eba plugin.
thoughts?
thanks
david jencks
On Feb 22, 2010, at 2:01 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
Jeremy Hughes wrote:
On 19 February 2010 13:09, Joe Bohn <[email protected]> wrote:
I'd also like to see us release the sample applications but I
think there is
at least one complication. Both Blog Sample and AriesTrader
generate EBAs
using different techniques - but both leverage the maven-antrun-
plugin to
finally produce a file of type "eba".
I realised the .eba file generated in the blog-assembly module
wasn't
being pushed into my local repo. I've made some changes to the
pom.xml
in ARIES-198 to fix this. So now it uses antrun to create the .eba
artifact and the build-helper-maven-plugin to push the artifact to
the
local repo. I needed to add NOTICE and LICENSE files to the .eba for
the ianal plugin in the verify phase to succeed.
I've not used the build-helper-maven-plugin before. Do you know if
it will work with the maven-release-plugin to push the eba
artifacts when we do a release? If so, then I should look at using
the same mechanism for AriesTrader.
I think the result is that the eba will not be available in a maven
repository.
One of the differences is that AriesTrader first generates a jar
using the
maven-assembly-plugin and then copies this to an eba. The jar
will be
managed by maven and IIUC it should be deployable as an
"application" even
with an extension of "jar" rather than "eba". If that is correct
then
perhaps delivery of an application jar is an acceptable approach
for the 1st
release. Unfortunately I haven't actually setup my equinox
assembly to
deploy the eba yet - it still deploys all of the individual
bundles.
Using the maven-assembly-plugin likely the preferred approach long
term. Perhaps we could copy the artifact to .eba and use the
build-helper-maven-plugin to remove the .jar artifact from maven
control and add the .eba one?
I can give this a try for AriesTrader. If it doesn't work out - is
there anything wrong with the approach I mentioned earlier of just
using the jar artifacts rather than the eba artifacts? Will the
current application support only look at *.eba archives?
Joe
Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I'd like to see at least those included:
* blueprint
* jmx
* jndi
* transaction
I don't think applications are really usable yet and I haven't
really
looked at JPA yet, so can't tell about it.
The transaction component is functional and we've been using it
mostly
unchanged since a long time in ServiceMix.
Do you have any particular concerns with it ? (I'm not talking
about
declarative transactions for blueprint, note).
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 04:19, Joe Bohn <[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks for the response (even while on vacation!) ... and for
volunteering
to be the release manager. Your response helps me get a better
picture
of
the plans.
I was really just interested in the general objectives and
timing since
it
hadn't been discussed yet. To get the release out in Feb means
it will
be
delivered next week. I'm afraid the hill might be a little too
steep to
climb that quickly but I'm happy to be proven wrong.
The more communication the better. It's important to get
everybody
thinking
and planning along the same lines (or understand quickly if
there are any
differences of opinion). Knowing that you are thinking of
creating a
release candidate next week means that we should be getting more
restrictive
on new content to avoid any unpleasant surprises.
I don't have any strong opinions on what should be in or out -
but in
general it doesn't make sense to release things that aren't
functional.
At
the moment I'm not sure what those are - but I suspect not all
of the
components are fully functional yet (for example transaction).
Best Regards,
Joe
Jeremy Hughes wrote:
Hi Joe, sorry I started setting myself up tuesday but am now
out on
vacation until monday.
Personally, I think the 0.1 release should serve to get what
we have
right now in the respectable form the ASF requires. So 'must
haves'
are to get the build in the right shape to create the
distribution
files that are acceptable to the IPMC. I think each main area
of the
code deserves at least a README to describe what's possible.
Since
this is the first release there are likely a few unknowns -
w.r.t
timing I hope/expect to get the release out this in feb. If
there are
particular JIRAs or other issues you feel should be included
please
say. I'd like to rename the current JIRA version 1.0 to 0.1
and target
issues for 0.1 appropriately and issues not for 0.1 to target
a new
0.2 version. WDYT?
Cheers,
Jeremy
On 18 February 2010 15:39, Joe Bohn <[email protected]> wrote:
Jeremy,
What are your current thoughts and goals regarding the
release and
potential
target dates?
I think it would be good if you could summarize your thoughts
in an
email
or
perhaps on a page in the wiki that we can keep updated as we
make
progress.
Of particular interest would be the content that we would
like to see
in
the first release (clarifying what we consider "must have"
from "nice
to
have"), the current status of that content, target dates for
the
release,
and the process that we plan to use to generate the release.
Thanks,
Joe
Jeremy Hughes wrote:
On 12 February 2010 09:39, Guillaume Nodet
<[email protected]> wrote:
Great, thanks a lot. Let us know if you need any help.
I guess if you take some notes, it would be interesting to
put those
on the wiki.
Certainly will. It's been a while since I did one and the
process has
changed quite a bit :-)
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:32, Jeremy Hughes <[email protected]
>
wrote:
Hi Kevan, thanks. I volunteer to be release manager.
Jeremy
On 11 February 2010 16:38, Kevan Miller <[email protected]
>
wrote:
Sounds like the consensus is for a release with all
components at a
0.1
version number. Best to start with a simple versioning
scheme, IMO.
Personally, I don't view a 0.1 blueprint release as an
issue.
Showing the ability to generate an Apache release is an
important
step
for the community. Would definitely like to see this
happen...
We'll need a release manager. Any volunteers?
--kevan
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
--
Joe
--
Joe
--
Joe
--
Joe
