Hi list, Sounds like a good idea to me. I would definitely like to reduce the number of projects: we have a number of api-only projects, with Maven's one-artifact-per-project setup, it would be nice to categorize projects by what they do, and 'carve up' the class space in that project in any way we see fit.
Also, I have been using BndTools for quite a while now, and really like the developer experience. That's a +1 from me! Angelo On Jun 28, 2012, at 10:39 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Hi Marcel, > > as discussed this morning, it sounds like a good idea. I took a look on > BndTools and it's interesting, fast, and stable (regarding the small tests > that I did ;)). > > I would be glad to help around that ! > > Regards > JB > > On 06/28/2012 10:37 AM, Marcel Offermans wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> When ACE entered the incubator a few years ago, we were using a highly >> customized Ant based build. At that time, as a community we decided that it >> would be easier to get started with ACE if we moved the build to Maven. >> >> Now, I think we have arrived at a point where we need to revisit that >> decision and consider moving to BndTools [1]. >> >> Probably the biggest reason for migrating from Maven to BndTools is to speed >> up and simplify development. In case you're not familiar with BndTools, it >> is an Eclipse plugin that provides an OSGi development environment based on >> Bnd. Compared to other environments, it is really fast. As soon as you hit >> "save" on one of your source files, a new version of your bundle is created >> and deployed, making any changes almost "instant". Bundles themselves are >> defined using "bnd" files and the plugin provides nice editors for those, as >> well as many different abstractions to talk to external repositories through >> OBR. There are many other advantages, such as tooling to help us correctly >> use semantic versioning throughout our project and easy ways to run and >> debug different bundle configurations. Headless builds are supported, as are >> unit and integration testing. An interesting twist is that deploying >> directly to ACE itself is also supported, so we as a project integrate >> nicely with this environme > nt. >> >> Another reason to move is that it could make our release process a lot >> simpler. Recent discussions within Apache about what constitutes an official >> release have emphasized that only source releases are "official" Apache >> releases and that those are the ones we should vote on. Afterwards we can >> obviously still make binary releases available, and I think in the case of >> ACE we should. During our releases in the incubator we have tried to strike >> a balance between doing "big bang" and "component" releases, setting up >> everything in such a way that we could do both. This has proven to be very >> complicated and doing releases was painful. With BndTools we can create one >> source archive that can be used "out of the box" to build everything and >> since this embeds all bundle and package versions we can decide to only bump >> those if something actually changes. For convenience we can then still >> provide both separate artifacts for Maven as well as shrink-wrapped binaries >> that can be used out of the box > . >> >> So, the main point I'd like to discuss is, what is your view on moving to >> BndTools? >> >> Greetings, Marcel >> >> [1] http://bndtools.org/ >> > > -- > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > jbono...@apache.org > http://blog.nanthrax.net > Talend - http://www.talend.com > > >
