> -----Original Message----- > From: Brett Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: dimanche 20 f�vrier 2005 23:59 > To: Maven Developers List > Subject: Re: [SCM] Question on maven.scm.svn.module property > > > >I've actually committed this replacement a few hours earlier. I have > tested > >it on a SVN project (but not yet on a CVS project) and I'd like to know > what > >you think it breaks. Also you mention a directory but I'm not sure which > >directory you're talking about. > > > >If I've made a mistake I need to fix it quickly... :-) > > > > > I might be missing something, but try it on one of the Maven plugins, > where pom.artifactId != directory name it is in.
I've tried this on one of my SVN projects where I've voluntarily set up pom.artifactId != module name. It was working fine (I haven't tried it with CVS though). I'll try it on one of the Maven plugins when I have time. Do you know why you think it may not work? (that'll win me some time if you tell me your suspicions :-)). > >>? > >> > >>It already does this, but it's deprecated. I think its best to continue > >>doing what it is doing. Besides, you can't depend on an unreleased > >>version of the SCM plugin. > >> > >>Honestly, I don't know what you are trying to achieve here. It's all > >>working as is, and the SCM end needs more work before its ready to be > >>used by other stuff. > >> > >>I don't want these kind of interdependencies cropping up. We should put > >>all the necessary utilities in Maven SCM and have cruise control use > >>that - but again, its not released yet and I don't know how soon that'll > >>happen. > >> > >> > > > >Errr... you've lost me :-) I'm trying to move everything related to SCM > in > >the SCM plugin so I thin we're on the same wavelength. It seems we only > have > >a communication issue... > > > >My questions is: > >- Today I have the code that I've shown up there (which spans tens of > >lines). How can I simplify it? > > > >You seem to be saying that there's a way to do so and that's exactly what > >I'm trying to do. > > > > > I'm saying that cruise control using the SCM plugin is a Bad Thing. It's > backwards compat for now, so its best to leave it as is, but if > something is changed it should be done properly. CC *was* using heavily the SCM plugin before I made the changes. It's now no longer using it except that I've just realized that I haven't removed the scm:validate calls. I don't think they're required any more. > > The Maven SCM library (which is utilised by the SCM plugin) should do > all of the repository URL parsing and handling. However, it's still in > alpha and I'd be loathe to introduce it to anything other than the SCM > plugin itself for now. > > What I'm saying is that it isn't broken, so stop trying to fix it :) It > could be better, but we are not at the point of being able to do that. Yes, I understand you're saying this... But what I'm telling you is that it currently does not support the URL notation without the ":" module (one pb that I know of is in the scm:validate goal). If that's a feature then it's all good :-). > > >ATM, I haven't enabled my changes that use the checkout and I'll actually > >remove them till the SCM plugin 1.5 is released. That's probably the > >easiest. > > > > > > > ok > > >>How? Guess? > >> > >>If people don't declare a module then they don't get what they expect > >>under the old plugin, and will continue to do so until we have it sorted > >>out completely. > >> > >> > > > >First I'm using the SCM 1.5 beta plugin so when you say old plugin I > assume > >you mean the previous version. I don't know anything about it as I'm not > >using it. > > > >Second, what I mean is that if I *don't* specify a module using the ":" > >notation, the plugin (the 1.5 beta version) stops with a failure message. > > > > > Please tell me on what project this is (or just the URL being used), > because it works for Maven, and it doesn't have any separator IIRC. Just try calling the scm:validate goal. Hmmm... Or, are you saying that the scm:validate goal is still there but is meant to be called only by code that has a URL using the ":" notation for modules? :-) > > >I thought you told me that the SCM 1.5 beta plugin should also work if > the > >module is part of the URL and not specified using the ":" notation. > > > > > Only in as much that the module is not ever used by the SCM plugin. > Look, we really need to get past this: Subversion has no concept of a > module. There was some artificial stuff introduced in the URL and > surrounding plugins so that stuff designed for CVS needed minimal > changes, but that's not good enough in the long term. > > If something is working in the current release of the SCM plugin (1.4.1) > and not working in 1.5 - let me know. Otherwise, let's please not change > it. I'm not planning to make any change. You're the "owner" of the 1.5 version. I'm just mentioning the issue that I've faced so that you know... ;-) > > >>>I think that we need to do; > >>> > >>>http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf:maven/maven-1/core/trunk: > >>>src/test/touchstone-build (i.e.: [root] + [trunk location] + [module]). > >>> > >>> > >>This gives a lot of flexibility, but means you need to declare every > >>branch and tag in the POM. > >> > >> > > > >Why every branch? Only the ones you wish to use... > > > > > Right, so you could just list the active branches. What about tags? You > potentially want all of them, and you've seen the mess that <versions/> > creates in the POM. > > >>How about (very rough): > >> > >><scm> > >> > >><url>scm:svn:http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/maven- > >>1/core/${tagBase}/src/test/touchstone-build</url> > >> <properties> > >> <svn.trunkBase>trunk</svn.trunkBase> <!-- the default --> > >> <svn.tagBase>tags/${tag}</svn.tagBase> <!-- the default --> > >> <svn.branchBase>branches/${tag}</svn.branchBase> <!-- the default -- > > > >> </properties> > >></scm> > >> > >> > > > >It's ok but I prefer the other option. What I don't like it too is that > it > >duplicates information already available in the POM (in the branch and > tag > >elements). > > > >BTW, why would you need to declare less information with your notation > than > >with the one I've proposed? :-) > > > > > Because tag can be parameterised. Ah right, I missed that one... :-) > > > > > > >>or: > >> > >><scm> > >> > >><url>scm:svn:http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/maven- > >>1/core/trunk/src/test/touchstone-build</url> > >> > >><branchUrl>scm:svn:http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/maven- > >>1/core/branches/${branch}/src/test/touchstone-build</branchUrl> > >> > >><tagUrl>scm:svn:http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/maven- > >>1/core/branches/${branch}/src/test/touchstone-build</tagUrl> > >> > >> > > > >Hmm... This would mean that BranchUrl and tagURL are a concept that exist > >for all SCM. This is not true I think. > > > > > it was rough, obviously this is an svn specific case and should be > considered appropriately. > > This is why I really don't like responding point by point with my half > thought ideas... :) Ok, fine. I'll let you think it over. I understand that I'm interrupting in something that is not yet ready for comments ;-) BTW, I'm pretty happy with everything as I've got the cruisecontrol plugin working the way I want it. FYI, the reason I was asking for a SCM 1.5 release date is because I'm writing (as you know) some text describing not only its usage but also the usage of plugins that depend on it and I'd like to know if it's going to be out before my text is out... :-) (the text should be out in about 3 months). More generally speaking I'd like to get a chance to talk to you in the coming days/weeks about the Maven 1.1 time frame you imagine and about the big changes (wagon, scm, etc). Thanks Brett and sorry for the hassle -Vincent --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
