> -----Original Message----- > From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Lenz > Sent: 25 June 2003 12:47 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Building Cactus with Maven -> I'd like to volonteer > > Vincent Massol wrote: > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Julien Dubois [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Sent: 23 June 2003 21:26 > >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Subject: Building Cactus with Maven -> I'd like to volonteer > >> > >>I don't want to spend too much time downloading stuff/configuring > >>eclipse, so I'd like to volonteer for porting Cactus to Maven. I see > >>that you plan to do so, and I've already worked with Maven before, so > >>I think I should be able to help. > > I don't think that a migration to Maven will be faster than downloading a > couple of JARs, but anyway...
certainly not! There are several order of magnitude of complexity and time differences... Julien, I hope that this is not your only motivation :-) > > > Very cool :-). I'm all for trying the move to Maven. However, there is > > one rule that I'd like us to follow: we must not loose any build feature > > when moving to Maven compared to our existing Ant build. This will be > > *very* challenging and will require Maven changes too (but that's ok, > > I'm a Maven committer and I can commit these changes). > > > > So here's my suggestion: > > - you start making the move for some subproject. Probably starting with > > jakarta-cactus/framework is the easiest > > - you send us the patch on the Cactus dev mailing list > > - we'll review it and comment on it > > - if ok, I'll create a branch until we finish releasing Cactus 1.5 and > > then move the Maven build to HEAD. > > - as you get more and more confident about the Cactus build and if > > you're still interested in participating and maintaining the Cactus > > build, then we would eventually be able to vote you in as a committer > > (please realize that we will need to ensure of your commitment and > > Cactus build knowledge before making such a decision). > > deja vu > http://archives.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?listName=cactus- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgId=371570 > ;-) hey, that's true. Jason, what's up? :-) > > > What you must realize is that once you start working on this, you'll > > have to help us all the way till the full Maven build works. It will be > > a long running project as we're doing clever stuff in the Ant build... > > :-) > > Let me add a couple of concerns/requirements: > > - We should not depend on Maven CVS HEAD or SNAPSHOT-something for the > build, only on a released "stable" version. Of course that would slow down > the migration if our build requires changes to Maven, because we'd need to > wait until those changes get incorporated into a release. Hum... Why not view it this way: - we use the latest Maven from CVS (we have to) to create the build system - once we consider it good enough for our users we wait for a stable Maven release and announce it as ready. > > - Instead of putting the Maven-based build into a branch, we should be > able > to just put it in CVS HEAD. But maybe I'm missing something, and it may > conflict with the Ant-based build? No it's not conflicting. I'd just not like to commit something that is half working in HEAD for the 1.5 release with is Real Soon Now (TM) :-) > > - The Ant build files remain the authorative, official build process > *until* > a vote is casted and agreed upon to completely switch to Maven. Yep. Agreed. > > - Cactus *must* be buildable by Gump. While I don't know the details, it > seems like many Mavenized projects either don't care about Gump, or keep a > separately maintained Ant build file. IIRC Maven can autogenerate Ant > build > files, but how well does that work for a non-trivial project? Not sure here. I'd say the requirements is that there is at least a nightly build done with recent versions of dependencies. I'm not sure it has to be done by gump though. But ok to start with this req. > > - I don't like the default Maven documentation/site style. It should be > possible to keep our current style, which we put a lot of work into. ... or improve the Maven style... ;-) Honestly, my interest in moving the build to Maven is twice: - get a simpler build system for Cactus - at the same time, test and improve Maven using Cactus as a guinea pig. In other words, I trust in Maven but it has some rough edges and using a real and complex project to smoothen them is the best way to go I believe. That said, getting help from Jason would also help tremendously... ;-) Thanks -Vincent --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
