I guess that we can configure the pom's in a way that the current
svn:externals remain the same. I think we could only change the
svn:externals for the current folder, having this structure:
current/pom.xml
|
+------ api/pom.xml
|
+------ share/pom.xml (?)
|
+------ impl/pom.xml
|
+------ tomahawk/pom.xml
|
+------ sandbox/pom.xml
|
+------ examples/pom.xml
|
+---- simple/pom.xml
|
+---- sandbox/pom.xml
.... examples, etc
It would easier to have again a 'share' package, but I guess we can
configure the tomahawk and impl pom's to fetch the shared sources. The
dependencies for each subproject should be defined in each pom.xml.
The root pom could have the common dependencies for all the
subprojects. I would like to hear the opinion of people who is more
used to maven for this...
#1) If we respect the current structure, it is necessary to configure
the jar artifact creation in each subproject pom in order to look for
the current sources. A set of properties might be used here, as the
relative path to sources is the same in every subproject. The
advantage is that no current element is moved. The disadvantage is
that we do not follow the conventions, thing that can imply less
stability, and more learning curve for users who have got used to
maven (eg, the resources are in the src/java folder, mixed with the
java sources)
#2) If we adapt the structure to maven, we have to move the current
sources in src/main/java folders, the resources in src/main/resources
and the test to src/test/java ... This will imply a more clear order
in the myfaces resources, but would imply an update of the svn
structure and the current ant scripts, then, a branch should be
created for security and everyone who is working on the code currenlty
should commit the changes. This way is harder, but the resulting
structure is neat.
Maybe, I would go first for #1 to get the overall idea of this and,
later, I would go for #2. In case we went for #2, I think we should
change the structure before creating a possible branch for JSF1.2...
That is just some brainstorming....
Bruno
2005/11/29, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> According to Wendy, its *much* easier to just change the structure to
> adopt to Maven. What I would like to do is set up a bunch of SVN
> externals to link everything in the manner which Maven expects. This
> way we can build nightlies without changing the structure that
> everyone else is dealing with. I figure we can experiment and see
> whether we can live with the reorg or not.
>
> What do you think?
>
> sean
>
> On 11/29/05, Bruno Aranda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I am fairly new to maven, but I could help with that if no one has
> > already done the script. I am also migrating a private project to
> > maven, so I am already dealing with this. One question is: it is the
> > intention to maintain the current structure, or do we adapt the source
> > tree to the conventions (eg. src/main/java, src/main/resources). IMO,
> > we need just to provide the pom.xml files for each subproject and a
> > general pom.xml that calls the subprojects poms...
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Bruno
> >
> >
> > 2005/11/29, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > If anyone has a Maven2 script in progress for MyFaces I would like to
> > > see it. I'm going to try and start one of my own if nobody produces
> > > one. Since I'm completely new to Maven I will be needing the help of
> > > our Maven experts. Hopefully the Tobago team and Struts lurkers will
> > > be able to help us as well ;-)
> > >
> > > I'm going to try and devote some time to this in between ApacheCon
> > > sessions ...
> > >
> > > sean
> > >
> >
>
