1-2) I would like to bring Guice to the mix. I think it is worth investigating for Continuum 2.0 - WDYT?

I need a reason to drop the current set of technologies, why is the new set better etc.
My motivations behind this were:
# leverage Java 5 language and other library features, and enable Continuum to do the same. # Encourage more contributions by using tools/libraries that have a good user base.

3) Builders > Build definitions
Just thinking out loud here...
Does anyone else see the current Continuum model to be centered around 'Project'? What do you think about 'Build' or BuildDefinition being central? You can add one or more Projects to a Build - we don't need Project Groups, as all we deal with is a Build. Order and dependency can be imposed on a Build composed of more than one project. Notifiers are added to a Build and BuildResult(s) produced for a Build.

This is way to detailed to be on a roadmap.
Yep, way too detailed for the roadmap but that was just a random thought, please ignore it at this stage ;-)

8) Installation
Lastly, I think it would nice to have a core Continuum install to be lean and small with features that can be added by dropping in relevant JARs (and minimal or no configuration). We can actually try different options with development releases before finalizing what should go into the main distro (if at all we break it up) - sounds reasonable?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. The current way to installing Continuum (unpack, run bin/plexus.sh) is still giving me "wow" when doing demos.
I was just hinting if Continuum dist could be leaner, but again may be too early at this point in time

What I would like to see is talk about the different ways of doing remoting and tool integration (IDEs in particular, but also desktop widgets).

Overall I think the core of Continuum should be re-though to be more pluggable. In particular a workflow engine should be in the middle of the execution to orchestrate any steps involved with building a project. This is one of the places where people should be able to plug in their own steps and functionality.

If someone is going down the plugin path, it is essential to me that these plugins can be written in vi inside an existing installation and copied around. This implies to me that we have to support a plugin language like jython, jruby or groovy.
I agree with the possibility supporting multiple plugin languages in the long run but just having support for Java based plugins for starters. I am not yet sure what all is involved in supporting plugins in other languages.


Reply via email to