http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-1911
On 7/28/06, Philip Dodds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
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 > >
-- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet
