2009/4/18 Felix Meschberger <[email protected]> > Hi, > > Clement Escoffier schrieb: > > Hi, > > On 18.04.2009, at 11:41, Felix Meschberger wrote: > > > >> Hi Stuart, > >> > >> Stuart McCulloch schrieb: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I'd like to stage a new release of our parent pom (ie. pom/pom.xml) - > >>> this > >>> will exercise the new release process. > >>> Are there any objections to starting this? Does anyone have any > >>> changes they > >>> would like to make to this pom? > >>> > >>> Note that this isn't a vote on the actual release - I will start that > >>> once > >>> I've staged it using Nexus. > >>> > >>> Also please hold off from any new releases until I've tried out the new > >>> process and documented it on the wiki :) > >> > >> Can we split the parent pom (definitions pertaining to all Felix > >> projects) and reactor (<modules> section) functionalities into into two > >> files by that matter ? > >> > >> We could for example create a reactor project at trunk, which stays at > >> SNAPSHOT version for ever and which we can update as we see fit to > >> accomodate new child projects. > >> > >> The actual parent pom would remain where it was and would be updated and > >> released for release new general setup such as the deployment > >> configuration. > >> > >> In addition it is IMO also a matter of separation of concerns (reactor > >> vs. general setup). We have done this in the Sling and Jackrabbit > >> projects with much success (IMHO). > > > > I agree having two files: > > - one with the reactor configuration and > > - one with the release / project configuration > > sounds good. > > > > Projects should inherit of the release / project configuration pom file. > > > > However, aren't we already in this mode ? Recently, I saw a pom file in > > the Felix root (the reactor one ?) and one in the pom folder. > > I was confused by this file, too. > > But the actual reactor is in the pom/pom.xml file. >
That's not quite right - Carsten created a top-level pom with a copy of the reactor and left the old modules definition in the parent pom. Since then new modules have been added to the top-level pom (hence the email about the build not working from the "pom" dir) I've removed the modules definition from the parent pom, because it's not needed anymore and just causes confusion (like this;) ... from now on modules should be added to the pom at the top of the project tree. So the top-level pom now has the reactor, and the parent pom has the global settings > > > Another idea would to use -Pprofile name instead of -Dpackaging=xxx. For > > example we can define a "default", a test profile, and an example > > Sounds reasonable. > > Regards > Felix > > > profile... The -Dpackaging=xxx was introduced to turn around a bug in > > Maven avoiding having different packaging types in a project. However, > > this issue is now fixed. So, maybe we can just remove this separation. > > > > Regards, > > > > Clement > > > > > >> > >> > >> Regards > >> Felix > >> > > > > > -- Cheers, Stuart
