On Sep 20, 2010, at 8:44 AM, Robert Muir wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 8:23 AM, Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org> wrote: > At any rate, the big problem w/ Maven and Lucene is not that > generate-maven-artifacts doesn't work, it's that the POM templates aren't > kept in sync. However, I think we now have a solution for that thanks to > Steve and Robert's work to make it easier to bring Lucene into IntelliJ. In > other words, that process does much of what is needed for Maven, so it should > be relatively straightforward to have it automatically generate the > templates, too. In fact, it would be just as easy for that project to simply > produce POM files (which are well understood and have a published spec) > instead of creating the IntelliJ project files, which are not well understood > and not publicly spec'd and subject to change w/ every release and simply > have IntelliJ suck in the POM file since IntelliJ supports that very, very > well. > > > So are you saying, instead of generating IntelliJ configuration, we generate > poms, and then we have a route, via maven, for users to automatically set up > their IntelliJ (and also eclipse?) IDEs? > > If so this sounds great to me. Because it would be nice to make the IDE > configuration easier, not just for IntelliJ.
Yes. I know for a fact IntelliJ can read the POMs. I use it all the time. Go check out Mahout and point IntelliJ at it's POM. You will be up and compiling (in your IDE) in less than 2 minutes give or take. I imagine Eclipse has similar support. > > Then, to automatically test Maven, we simply need to do a few things: > 1. Generate the templates > 2. Build the Maven artifacts and "install" them (this is a Maven concept that > copies them to your local repository, usually in ~/.mvn/repository, but it > can be in other places and it should be clean) > 3. Generate a "test" pom that includes, as dependencies all the Lucene Maven > artifacts and maybe even compiles a small source tree with it > > > +1. this would resolve all my concerns about maven, because we have a way to > test that it stands a chance of working *before release*. > > I hope you don't think I am picking on maven here, I'm equally disturbed > about the demo application, and i think it should have a basic unit test too > that indexes stuff, fires itself up in jetty, and runs a search. I totally understand it. I'm not some Maven fanboi (especially as the person who used it to put together the Mahout release, initially). I know it's warts, believe me, as I have lived the pain. That being said, for _most_ users (i.e. not necessarily us committers) who are simply using Lucene/Solr within a much broader environment of dependencies, having the JARs available in the Maven repo w/ correct POM files is a very good thing that makes it so much easier for them to do their day to day work and I would hate to see that go away, especially since it is something we have supported for quite some time, albeit with varying levels of success. > > Like maven, i know some people don't necessarily like the demo, but as long > as we are going to ship it, I want tests so that we dont find its completely > nonfunctional after the release. Unlike maven, i think i stand a chance of > actually being able to write the test for this one though. I've been wanting to do those Maven tests for a while now, but simply can't find the time relative to my other priorities. I guess if the community is saying that if someone doesn't step up, it's going to be dropped, I'll step up. I can likely commit to it before the next release. -Grant --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
