So maybe breaking it up into two builds - core/tooling and everything else?
Is there a JIRA for the Maven bug? P On 7/28/06, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Not really. There is a bug in maven which cause maven plugins with extension to not being used when build in the current build. Not sure I'm very clear, here. The problem happen when you build from a clean machine. You can not do mvn install from the root and expect everything to work. This works for simple maven plugins, but not for plugins using "extensions" :( You need to do mvn -N install cd tooling mvn install cd .. mvn install At least, it is my understanding on how maven currently works. On 7/28/06, Philip Dodds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > One note on the plugin - with the re-org the build order would succeed if > you built core first - the tooling - then everything else since nothing in > core requires the plugin > > P > > On 7/28/06, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 7/28/06, Philip Dodds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I put together a basic plan (with some help from Guillaume), here > > > > > > http://goopen.org/confluence/display/SM/Source+Structure > > > > > > The purpose of the new structure it two allow cleaner separation > > between: > > > > > > 1/ The JBI Container > > > 2/ Deployables such as shared libraries/BC's/SE's > > > 3/ Platform specific packaging projects > > > 4/ Archetypes > > > 5/ Tooling > > > 6/ Sampels > > > > > > By categorizing the source it should become easier to read and > therefore > > > identifying what SE/BC's/SL's are available should become more > > > obvious, as > > > well as cleanly showing what is required for core Container > > functionality. > > > > > > There are a couple of ommissions - first rather than one assembly > > > (currently > > > apache-servicemix project) I would like to add a root directories > called > > > assemblies and then create a few packaging (as previously mentioned) > > > > > > ie. > > > > > > assemblies > > > \ core-only > > > \ core-and-components > > > etc. > > > > > > +1 to this reorg > > The question is wether we will release everything at the same time or > not. > > Currently, the problem is that we need to build the maven plugin in a > > first > > step, > > else maven will not pick it while building the whole source tree. > > We could avoid that if we could release the plugin, then use it to build > > the > > source tree > > (as done in Geronimo). But the maven plugin needs the core container > > before > > :( > > > > The other is the servicemix-components package, there are two ways to > go > > > here: > > > > > > 1/ Break up the components into different service engines > > > > > > Or break the components jar into different jars. > > This would allow to replace all optional dependencies by non optional > > dependencies > > and the maven plugin could be used to generate SU and bundle all the > > necessary dependencies. > > > > 2/ Turn the servicemix-components jar into an SE, add a dependencies on > > the > > > servicemix-lwcontainer and then change all the libs to optional false > > > > > > I'm not keen on the first way because I think the conversion to real > > SE's > > > will take some time and should be given space to make sure we are able > > to > > > address things like WSDL for services etc. > > > > > > In the second option we end up with a large SE though I believe it > will > > > provide all the functionality, I was thinknig that this would be a > > > special > > > packaging - ie. your can download just that big SE separate from the > > other > > > assemblies. > > > > > > Yeah, maybe. We need to rewrite the examples to be less focused on > > servicemix-lwcontainer. > > > > I would like to try and get a discussion going on this since once this > is > > > out of the way we could then look to the work invovled in converting > > some > > > of > > > the lw-container service engines into more complete JBI Service > Engines > > > (using the service-engine architype as a basis) and also work on > puting > > > more > > > WSDL in place for those services :) > > > > > > +1 > > > > P > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Cheers, > > Guillaume Nodet > > > > > > -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet
