IMO #2 is a nice to have... But is certainly not required to add intermediate poms to group modules.
Once maven2ization is done, then I imagine than the entire project structure should be reevaluated and ultimatly changed. --jason -----Original Message----- From: "Prasad Kashyap" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:36:18 To:[email protected] Subject: Re: Restructuring top level pom.xml Thank you David. ----- You wrote ---- This means two things: 1. there needs to be modules/pom.xml which is the parent of everything in modules. Same goes for the other dirs, configs, assemblies, etc. The parent pom of modules/pom.xml would be the root pom.xml (if we want a root pom). 2. each child project must use it's artifactId as it's directory name. So 'kernel' becomes 'geronimo-kernel', etc. ----------------------------- Yep, this is what I was talking about. So I guess we'll have to wait till we are completely done with migrating to Maven2 before we do #2 above. That would be the safest thing to do given the ongoing maven 1 builds. Cheers Prasad On 3/17/06, David Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mar 17, 2006, at 10:32 AM, Prasad Kashyap wrote: > > > Our top level pom.xml lists all the modules that M2 must traverse to > > build them individually. We currently have around 40 modules specified > > in the list. We'll soon add some more and then move on to adding 53 > > configs, 16 applications, 7 plugins and some 6 assemblies (give or > > take a few more). > > > > This will make our top level pom.xml a huge big list. Are we sure we > > want to keep it structured this way ? > > > > What say we have add pom.xmls in the intermediate directories like > > modules, config, applications, assemblies, plugins etc. These would go > > forth and build the directories under them. This would kep our top > > level pom.xml easy to read. This would also mirror the tree structure > > that we currently have. > > > > Here are my thoughts on the subject: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg18122.html > > -David > >
