Berin Loritsch wrote:
-1 (vote not veto) if we migrate to use a cvs version of any build tool. -0 for setting up our build system based on a beta release, and +1 for setting up based on a stable release. This kinda goes for both maven and centipede, but see below.Several of our committers are very keen on Maven, and we have a butt- load of releases to make. The question is, should we do the Maven migration project by project as we release, should we wait until after the releases to decide?Maven is pretty solid, and I actually do prefer it to Centipede (sorry Nicola). Our users need a stable build process that does not change every time we upgrade a version number. We can do this now, or wait. VOTE POINTS ----------- Use Maven as build tool (+1 from me)
I have yet to take a good look at recent maven and try it out. We have four requirements:
1) be easier than ant to use in addressing our build requirements
2) GUMP integration
3) 'compatible' with forrest
4) stability, documentation, etc
I know for certain it satisfies (1). Maven has some cool technology, esp Jelly.
wrt (2), I heard something about maven incorporating its own integration tool instead of gump, but I also heard of efforts to get them cooperating. I think it's vital that there's only one integration setup for ASF java software, as the value of integration decreases rapidly if less projects join in. If we cannot move to maven and be a part of gump that'd change my vote to -1. But I don't think that is the case:
http://cvs.apache.org/builds/gump/latest/module_jakarta-turbine-maven.html
wrt (3), I doubt that it would be that hard (I believe maven provides support for ant, so it should provide some support for forrest too). If you need to type `maven; forrest;` instead of just `maven`, well, I can also live with it.
wrt (4), There's also always the concern that a product you depend on is here to stay, stable, contains few bugs, and is easy for our users to use. This is important. I think the potential problem here is "stable".
I'd planned to delay looking at maven again until beta8. From a quick glance at maven-dev (ie I could be wrong), it sounds like more users are anxiously waiting for it but it isn't getting here anytime soon (there was talks in december, then halfway january, again today...it's still in alpha development looking at all the commits).
Most people are currently running maven from cvs head apparently. I wouldn't be happy at all if we were to rely on a cvs version of a build tool. Just spells disaster.
Do migration as we release each project (+1 from me)
if the first proposal goes through, +1 on this one. cheers, - Leo --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
