On 5/24/10 4:10 AM, David Jencks wrote: > I'm working on cleaning up the build (BVAL-58). Here are a few things I > suggest changing -- these will be in at least one version of my patch -- and > some questions. > > 1. It seems pretty standard nowadays to name bundles such as apache-bval by > their package name, so it would be <artifactId>org.apache.bval</artifactId> >
Yeah, I've always hated this extended naming scheme, but that's fine if we want to get it in 0.1-incubating. I'll take a look at it this morning. > 2. I don't think its worth the trouble to use antrun to figure out the svn > version. Maven already creates a property file that includes the project > version. If anyone really wants this info, I'd hope they would write an > scm-plugin mojo to do it. > Well, this sounds more like a refinement/improvement of what we have, so not a stop-ship for 0.1-incubating. The point, is that we have a properties file in the built artifacts, which allows users (and us) to easily tell what build they are using when reporting bugs. This has proven very valuable in the OpenJPA builds. > 3. Is anyone interested in using slf4j instead of commons-logging? > Yes, but for 0.2-incubating. See separate email thread by Carlos. > 4. For use in osgi, I'm not sure why any packages are exported. Isn't the > idea that you create the validator through the spec api and configure it > through a provided xml file if necessary? I really doubt exporting > everything is a good idea. > OK, I'll take a look at it this morning. > 5. Reading the eclipse documentation at > http://help.eclipse.org/ganymede/index.jsp?topic=/org.eclipse.platform.doc.isv/reference/misc/bundle_manifest.html > it looks to me like the Eclipse-AutoStart header is obsolete and does > nothing (modern osgi frameworks behave this way by default). > OK, I'll take a look at it this morning. -Donald > thanks! > david jencks > >
