My original statement was that IDEA ran fine. I was just goofing something on the Ant build.sh... not sure what. It wasn't a big deal because IDEA ran it fine.
Brandon On 2/15/07, Clinton Begin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In IDEA, right click on the Ant build file in the Ant sidebar. Choose Properties. Choose the Additional Classpath Tab. Select Add All In Directory, choose the devlib directory. For command line, just dump all the devlib jars into your ant/lib folder. That will ensure all dependencies are met for the Ant plugins (just JUnit, Optional, and JDK tools). Clinton On 2/14/07, Brandon Goodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "We don't require a shell script now." > > True. I used the ant script from IDEA the other day because i got tired of > fiddling around with the shell script. I didn't go too deep. But I was > having problems getting it running on the mac. Likely something i didn't > have configured right. > > The nice thing about Maven is that it handles all the runtime > loading/downloading of plugins that it requires to operate based upon the > pom. So, in the end we can have shell scripts to make the builds one click > builds, but we won't have to worry about setting up classpaths for it in the > scripts. > > If you want you can download the latest maven 2 > (http://maven.apache.org/download.html). Follow the simple > setup at the bottom of that page. Then update to the latest ibatis and run > 'mvn clean install' from the command line of the project root. See how it > goes. That command will build the ibatis jar and run the unit tests. > > Brandon > > > On 2/14/07, Clinton Begin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We don't require a shell script now. The .bat and .sh files are > > optional. You're perfectly welcome to install Ant separately (like > > you will have to with Maven) and just call ant from within the /build > > directory. > > > > Clinton > > > > On 2/14/07, Nathan Maves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > +1 and my vote counts! > > > > > > Speaking from personal experience I have wanted to move to a new build > tool > > > for a while. While most of you will pay though the nose for the latest > M$ > > > Vista, I run on unix machine. The use of shell scripts for build > purposes > > > is not a good xplatform solution. > > > > > > Just from a quick glance Maven seems to make somewhat time consuming > tasks > > > in Ant easy. > > > > > > Lets do this. > > > > > > Nathan > > > > > > > > > On 2/14/07, Brandon Goodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > The broader purpose of this is not just to see if we can get jars into > > > maven but rather to see if maven can simplify our build/release process. > If > > > you have a one liner then that is great. I'd love to see it. > > > > > > > > Brandon > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/14/07, Slava Imeshev < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I seriously doubt that this would require switching to Maven > > > > > build. > > > > > > > > > > I cannot speak for a global catalog, but adding an item built > > > > > with Ant to a local Maven repository is a one-liner. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > Slava Imeshev > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: "Jeff Butler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > To: < dev@ibatis.apache.org>; < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 10:09 AM > > > > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Support for Maven (impacts Java version only) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes - I should have asked that question with more subtlety. I > guess > > > the > > > > > > bottom line is that it is *possible* to get the jars to the > repository > > > > > > without doing a maven build, but doing a maven build makes it much > > > easier to > > > > > > publish to the repository. And our history shows that we are > unlikely > > > to > > > > > > get the jars to the repository with the build process we are using > > > now. > > > > > > Right? > > > > > > > > > > > > Jeff > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/14/07, Larry Meadors < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IMO, that is like "Can we clean a toilet with a toothbrush?" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, we can, but who wants to offer up their toothbrush? Not me! > :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The question to me is: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Can we get the iBATIS jars to the maven repository without > doing a > > > > > > > maven build, and is it the right way to do it?" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes we can, but no it's not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Larry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/14/07, Brandon Goodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > > > "Can we get the iBATIS jars to the maven repository without > doing > > > a > > > > > > > maven > > > > > > > > build?" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/14/07, Jeff Butler < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In my own little perfect world, I'm -1. The iBATIS ant > build is > > > so > > > > > > > simple > > > > > > > > now - I hate to see it mucked up just to supply the Maven > meta-bs > > > as > > > > > > > Clinton > > > > > > > > so eloquently put it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, I would like to see the iBATIS jars in the Maven > > > repository - > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > for no other reason than to help those who can't figure out > how to > > > set a > > > > > > > > classpath without a tool. If a maven build makes that > possible > > > then I > > > > > > > guess > > > > > > > > I'd be +2, but reluctantly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think that supporting both Ant and Maven is problematical > - > > > seems > > > > > > > like > > > > > > > > we should just pick one for simplicity going forward. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I guess I can't give a single vote. Can someone > definitively > > > > > > > answer > > > > > > > > this question: Can we get the iBATIS jars to the maven > repository > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > doing a maven build? That's the key point for me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jeff Butler > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/14/07, Clinton Begin < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It strikes me that there was enough discussion around the > > > Maven > > > > > > > build > > > > > > > > > > to warrant an official vote for Maven support. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +2 => Replace our Ant build entirely with a Maven build. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 => Support Maven by including a Maven build alongside > our > > > Ant > > > > > > > build. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0 => Don't care or I don't know enough about Maven to > decide. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -1 => Do not support maven. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > Clinton > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
