Niall, really appreciate our input!
On 12.04.2007, at 06:22, Niall Pemberton wrote:
1) NOTICE / LICENSE
The issue raised by Rahul about the missing NOTICE and LICENSE files
gets a bit complex.They are not specified as a "resource" element in
version 2 of the commons parent pom (which AFAIK would cause them to
be included in all modules) because of a bug in the maven source
plugin (MSOURCES-6) with resource elements in the base directory - so
it has an "antrun" workaround which doesn't seem to have worked in
this multi-module case.
Grr
We're still waiting for a release of that
plugin so the workaround can be removed. One solution is to move these
to jci/src/main/resources (which is the default resources location for
maven)
For every artifact you mean?
and AFAIK will result in them being automatically included in
all jars (except the test jars - not sure how you get them there).
Also the NOTICE.txt has 1999-2006 in the copyright statement - should
be 2007 (and is 1999 really the start year?)
That should be 2004. Fixed.
2) Dependencies
Couple of points - any reason not to depend on the latest versions of
commons components (Collections 3.2 rather than 3.1, IO 1.3.1 rather
than 1.1, Lang 2.3 rather than 2.1)?
Also the following report hightlights dependency discerepancies:
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/jci/commons-jci-core/dependency-
convergence.html
FAM depends on JUnit 3.8.2 and everything else 3.8.1 and Core depends
on Logging 1.0.4 and FAM depends on Logging 1.1.
Just didn't bother. Fixed that up, too.
Also in the most of the module's pom.xml the core-test-jar dependency
has version 1.0-SNAPSHOT rather than 1.0-RC1.
Well, that I don't know. I was just using the usual mvn release process.
I fear maven missed the attached jar. Not sure how to deal with that
yet.
Could be a maven bug - but not sure. Could also be that maven messed up
when I re-did the RC1 after an unsuccessful try.
Will watch that closely next time.
Usually I don't mind
whether people use the older RC method or create the actual aritifacts
to be distributed - but in this case theres too many things to forget
in a multi-module release so I won't vote on a RC for JCI - only the
actual artifacts.
So you want really individual votes for each artifact? ...keep in mind
there is only one site though.
3) Source/Binary distros
Any reason not to produce the usual source/binary distros for JCI -
rather than just maven artifacts?
Well, how much different would that be? We could zip up artifacts
but e.g. the site does not work offline (stupid!) unless you do a
site:stage.
Any suggestions?
4) pom.xml Name & Description
None of the module pom.xml have descriptions (only JCI parent) which
are used on the generated module site.
OK ...added those
Also the commons parent pom
uses the name in the manifest entries in the jar - having a name like
"fam" (rather than e.g. JCI fam) makes those entries less useful.
Well, that requires a new release of the parent pom.
5) site.xml
Seems that all the modules are using the parent site.xml, since they
don't have one - which means all the module sites have a "Usage",
"FAQ" and "Downloads" links which are broken. You probably need to
include site.xml for each module to avoid this.
As the site.xml is inherited I would assume the links get adjusted.
That sucks! How stupid is that?
6) Source Xref links
Seems that the amalgamated source xref is generated OK - but reports
in modules that link to it are broken - guess thats probably a maven
bug.
Yeah ...wouldn't know how to fix that
7) JDK Version
The commons parent pom is set up to compile with a source/target
version of 1.4 by default - and it adds entries to the jar's manifest
indicating this (X-Compile-Source-JDK and X-Compile-Target-JDK). In
the JSR199 module (I realize its not part of the RC, but is in RC1
tag) you have overriden this to specify JDK 1.6 via the plugin config
- this would result in the manifest indicating 1.4 - the way to
specify this is by adding properties to the JSR199 pom.xml rather than
using the plugin config:
<properties>
<maven.compile.source>1.6</maven.compile.source>
<maven.compile.target>1.6</maven.compile.target>
</properties>
Ah ...good catch. Fixed!
Is 1.4 the correct setting for all the other modules?
Yes
cheers
--
Torsten
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
