HI! while I see the advantage of having a "all modules" build, at the same time I wouldn't like to see it driving us the components development.
I personally still want to share with you my personal vision of Onami modules as individual components, with their own development lifecycle and releases. So, I think it is good to keep the relativePath, in order to have working builds, but until we won't make the first stable release of the parent, in order to drop that reference and consider each module as individual component. Take apache commons as a sample - as pattern, not implementation ;) thanks a lot for keeping things moving forwards! All the best, -Simo http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ http://twitter.com/simonetripodi http://www.99soft.org/ On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Christian Grobmeier <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi guys, > > I have added relative paths to the parent poms of some modules, like in > logging: > > <parent> > <groupId>org.apache.onami</groupId> > <artifactId>onami-parent</artifactId> > <version>1-SNAPSHOT-incubating</version> > <relativePath>../parent</relativePath> > </parent> > > Otherwise it would fail to build from root level. That said I think it > is not good if one wants to build from a sub module. > > Any ideas how we can improve that? > > It leads me to the question why we have a separated aggregator from a > parent pom module. I don't know the benefits, but it feels like we are > doing a bit too much. Maybe somebody can explain that too me. > > Cheers > Christian > > -- > http://www.grobmeier.de > https://www.timeandbill.de
