>>Regarding the incremental build: This has nothing to do with Eclipse.

I know that, I was using that as a example of a similarly complex OS based
eco system that also has binary backwards compatibility issues/goals.

>>I'm was even aware that they have a problem.

I have a vague recollection that they did once. My point was, it's not that
simple.

>>This is really something I personally need as well - as do thousands of
other maven users. My company build currently takes 5 minutes as it has 98
modules atm. Other projects I

5 Minutes I wish!. Try 3.5 hours (which I just cut down to 42 minutes via
-T8)!

>>maintain/build regularely (OpenWebBeans, DeltaSpike, MyFaces, OpenJPA,
OpenEJB, ...) are not that large, but it's really annoying to always need
to clean a project and do all over again because the change detection is
utter broken currently.

In cases like this, I cheat.

I set up separate Jenkins jobs, for each module, and let it sort out the
dependencies. Then it cascades nicely.

-Chris

On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 10:33 PM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote:

> >I'm going to take the risk of making a fool of myself by asking, but:
>
> Not at all, those are good questions actually!
>
>
> > I don't care so much about
> > *how* something is done, I care greatly about *what* can be done.
>
> Well, that's exactly what it is about. Without having this source in our
> repo again (where it originally was before it got moved out to codehaus and
> later to some 'private' github repo), we cannot maintain maven effectively.
> That sucks big times and hinders the daily development.
>
>
> >I see a lot of (proposed) work going on here about incremental
> compilation,
>
> >hugely complex refactoring etc.
>
> Actually the refactorings are not that huge. It's a 1:1 import swap for
> most of it.
>
>
> Regarding the incremental build: This has nothing to do with Eclipse. I'm
> was even aware that they have a problem. This is really something I
> personally need as well - as do thousands of other maven users. My company
> build currently takes 5 minutes as it has 98 modules atm. Other projects I
> maintain/build regularely (OpenWebBeans, DeltaSpike, MyFaces, OpenJPA,
> OpenEJB, ...) are not that large, but it's really annoying to always need
> to clean a project and do all over again because the change detection is
> utter broken currently.
>
>
> People had the same fear as some people started working on the parallel
> build support.
>
> I think it is really worth a try to get incremental builds done properly.
>
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> >________________________________
> > From: Chris Graham <[email protected]>
> >To: Maven Developers List <[email protected]>; Mark Struberg <
> [email protected]>
> >Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 2:21 PM
> >Subject: Re: Removing unused code from maven-shared-utils
> >
> >I'm going to take the risk of making a fool of myself by asking, but:
> >
> >I see a lot of (proposed) work going on here about incremental
> compilation,
> >hugely complex refactoring etc.
> >
> >But, I've got to ask, what's the benefit?
> >
> >Or put another way, looking at the amount of effort, wouldn't it be better
> >to spend the time elsewhere?
> >
> >I am aware of some of the issues that people like the eclipse foundation
> >have had with incremental compilation, so I'd approach this one with
> >caution. [From what I remember about it, anyway]
> >
> >These are just questions that I'd ask myself if I was going to attempt
> >something like this.
> >
> >-Chris
> >
> >PS: I tend to approach things from a commericial point of view. I care far
> >more about function rather than form, that is, I don't care so much about
> >*how* something is done, I care greatly about *what* can be done.
> >
> >On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> While digging thru the plexus-utils usage I wonder whether we should
> place
> >> the maven-utils in maven-core or maven-shared.
> >>
> >> maven-core doesn't yet have any maven-shared dependency it seems. Which
> >> means if we like to use them in maven-core as well we should relocate
> >> maven-shared-utils to the maven-3 core module.
> >>
> >> wdyt?
> >>
> >> LieGrue,
> >> strub
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> > From: Kristian Rosenvold <[email protected]>
> >> > To: Maven Developers List <[email protected]>
> >> > Cc:
> >> > Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 10:48 AM
> >> > Subject: Re: Removing unused code from maven-shared-utils
> >> >
> >> > Well obviously given the current number of failing
> >> > tests,maven-shared-utils is going nowhere right now ;)
> >> >
> >> > I will do a test-migration and remove unused code in
> >> > org.apache.maven.shared.utils.io before we release.
> >> >
> >> > Kristian
> >> >
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >> >
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

Reply via email to