On 17/12/2011 18:42, Antonio Petrelli wrote: > 2011/12/17 Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> > >> On 17/12/2011 18:35, Antonio Petrelli wrote: >>> 2011/12/17 Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> >>> >>>> On 17/12/2011 18:14, Antonio Petrelli wrote: >>>>> Ok then interprete my words as: now you can use a staging repository. >>>>> This way, artifacts may be tested *before* they are released. >>>> >>>> The scp+rsync process also has a staging repository (and using that did >>>> not cause any meta-data issues). >>>> >>>> The JARs are the standard Tomcat JARs. The Maven release process just >>>> adds the metadata files and moves the JARs + metadata around. Since the >>>> JARs are already tested as part of the Tomcat release process, we never >>>> had a need to use the staging repository and I don't see that changing. >>>> >>>> There is also a snapshot repository and we did use that early on in the >>>> Tomcat 7 development process (before the first release) mainly because >>>> one user who was doing a lot of testing was using Maven and the snapshot >>>> repository was the easiest way to get them the latest build. We stopped >>>> using the snapshot repository some time ago. I can't remember if it was >>>> after the first release or after the first stable release. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Ok then using Nexus makes sense only if you are going to use Maven for >> all >>> the release process (it's a matter of two commands and a Nexus stage >>> promotion). >>> I think that now you should change the subject into: why should you >> switch >>> to pure Maven build process? :-D (Joking, but not too much) >> >> Yeah, that isn't going to happen :) >> >> I've seen way to much pain and grief with Maven on the Commons list to >> ever want to even think about converting the Tomcat build process to Maven. >> > > Commons? That's strange, they are only libraries. Probably they never had > <cringe-mode-off /> a Maven wizard like me <cringe-mode-on />. > Seriously, if I have the time, I could fork Tomcat 7 from GitHub to try if > I can change this situation. I already did it for Velocity (using SVN). The > only difficulty is the website.
Personally, I am of the view "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". If there was something we would gain by switching to Maven then I'd be interested but given we have an established build process with Ant that a number of committers are familiar with and that I'm not aware of any benefits of moving to Maven then I don't see any compelling reason to switch. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
