On 12/12/05, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 12/11/05, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > robert burrell donkin wrote: > > > IMO the critical issues are releases and the site. look's like hen's on > > > top of the site issue but i'd like to pick up on the releases issue. > > > > > > i've never been happy with the maven dist and try to avoid using it. the > > > commons has ended up with lots of shared customization. this is now > > > getting too much. ensuring that commons releases are up to the required > > > standard is taking far too much energy. i think that this needs to > > > change: we need a new strategy. we need to invest time in automation to > > > save time later and maven is a good match for this problem. > > > > I totally agree. The Maven2 assembly plugin allows simpler customisation > > of the distribution goals, and the other manual steps like signing the > > release are being addressed (see commons-openpgp). > > > > I'm happy to use commons as a test case for both site and release > > improvements. > > > > > in theory, it would be better to work by feeding back our requirements > > > into maven. > > > > +1 > > > > +1 from me as well. We have had very good success, IMHO, getting > enhancements into maven to support commons needs over the past couple > of years and I see no signs that it is getting more difficult for us. > Just like here, the key is to invest some in creating tickets and > ideally patches and follow up a little. > > > >>I think the main reason not to move to Maven 2 yet is that it would > > >>fragment commons, which would be an issue. At the least there should be > > >>parallel builds. > > > > > > > > > could you expand on this a little? > > > > I just expected that people would not like to have different ways to > > build different components, so introducing parallel builds might be the > > best way to start introducing m2. But as far as what commons needs, > > Maven 2 should cover more than what m1 does now. > > > > Can you expand a little more on this, Brett? If maven 2 will cleanly > solve our site and dist problems, it might be best to bite the bullett > and put our energies there. Specifically, we need to be able to do > "maven dist" and meet all the requirments here: > http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-commons/ReleaseChecking > and we need "maven site" to generate a site with the common l & f > currently kludged together in commons-build. Everything beyond that > is gravy ;-)
>From what I've seen of maven2, our site and dist problems will still exist in m2. We have very specific needs for both of these issues, and I feel a better solution in either m1 or m2 would be to codify the needs into one or more plugins. The release process definitely fits into this category. We definitely need to make it easier to get new people involved. I'm not sure using a brand new product (maven2) will help here. -- http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/ "You are going to let the fear of poverty govern your life and your reward will be that you will eat, but you will not live." - George Bernard Shaw --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
