Hi David, I also agree with you about the speed maven2 provides compared to maven1. That was very much obvious for me when I was using maven2 to build Axiom.
BUT, this effort should be done and maintained by some one and he/she should be able to handle issues as fast as possible. Well that statement might seen unfair in the open source world, but please understand that all the devs have a very hard dependency on the build system. If there is a problem, then if they can't fix it, then they can not do *anything* after that. Even you have mentioned, you don't have much of time for this effort. Jochen was doing a very good job, but I didn't see it is finished yet. Please do remember that we have lot of custom scripts inside Axis2 and, *each and everyone* of them are important. So if some one is converting Axis2 to maven2 and is trying to remove maven1 scripts, then - all the modules must be converted to maven2 - all the scripts, including release and day-to-day used compile-and-test goals must be converted. - there should be documentation on the new goals available as AFAIK, most of the devs are still very new to maven2 Until then I prefer maven1. It is better to keep a known devil than an unknown angel :). Please please do not take this as an opposing idea to convert to maven2. I also prefer very much for that. But I can not forget the unpleasant experiences I had, when I was releasing Axiom, some time ago (But Thanks Jochen for later fixing those problems). +1 for moving security modules out of Axis2. But please make sure, there is enough integration tests written inside Axis2, to compensate for security integration tests. -- Chinthaka David Illsley wrote: > Hi all, > I had a play with using Maven2 for Axis2 recently to see what kinds of > speedups we could get. Dims noticed, we had a chat, and he asked me to > write up my thoughts. > > It wasn't totally simple so I focussed on the kernel module and got > about a 50% speedup between a maven -o clean test and a mvn -o clean > test > > The current approach of having build files for both isn't really > working because it's difficult to keep them in sync which (at the > moment) means build breaks in the maven2 build. It's also I think lead > to a problem with the maven2 artifacts publshed for 1.1 Finally, > maven2 encourages certain styles that doesn't match with maven1 so > it's not easy to take full advantage of maven2 in parallel with a > maven1 build. > > Given that, I'd suggest that moving forward we either switch entirely > to maven2 for the next release or remove the incomplete and > erratically maintained maven2 poms. If the former approach is taken I > believe that it would be possible to temporarily maintain both systems > so as not to lose build stability. > > I think that moving to maven2 would probably be a good move but it > will need buy-in from everyone as it will affect all modules*. Dims > has suggested 1.2 is a reasonable target, aiming it at 1Q '07 and I > agree though I don't have lots of time to commit to this effort. > > What do people think? > David > > * This might also be a good time to move the security modules out to a > separate project as we've discussed before.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
