> Niclas Hedhman wrote: > > * The whole of Avalon was converted to Maven quite some time ago, and that is > > probably when Gump support started to crack badly. What would Gump folks say > > if we took the step of having <maven> in the avalon gump descriptors? > > I don't think we're quite ready just yet: > > http://lsd.student.utwente.nl/gump/incubator-geronimo/gump_work/build_incubator-geronimo_incubator-geronimo.html
I suspect (hope) this might be a config mismatch more than not being ready, i.e. dependencies in the POM not in the GOM. ;-) I think we need to start with smaller (fewer dependencies projects) and work up. I don't have time (or enough samples) to 'prove' that other than say see these next two suggest we are in the ballpark. http://lsd.student.utwente.nl/gump/jakarta-gump-test/gump-test-maven1.html http://lsd.student.utwente.nl/gump/jakarta-gump-test/gump-test-maven2.html Test2 depends on Test1, as does the source code, hence uses jar overrides. > but the goal is a good one. Maybe we should try both (add experimental > projects that use <maven/>, move over incrementally if those work)... Agreed. My issues is jar 'id' name in GOM (for projects not built by Maven) and MAven artifact name. I suspect we'll need to add more and more id= attributes to GOM descriptors. > > * One of the things that I can imagine is a real worry is the build time > > required for Maven compared to Ant, but the Maven-1.0-rc2 is showing > > significant improvements. > > We don't want to worry about that. Gump tries to emulate developer > behaviour. And if developers are using maven, gump wants to use it too. Agreed. > > * How are the dependency Jars being passed to Maven, and getting Maven to > > ignore the cached local repository? > > I have no idea (someone else will ;) > Gump generates a properties file, and in there it sets the jar override and then (by artefact id) set the jars paths. http://lsd.student.utwente.nl/gump/incubator-geronimo/incubator-geronimo.html#Project-level+Files > > * Should the <maven> feature in Gump, not use the Maven POM and properties > > files, since all the information about the builds are available there? Is > > this planned, or considered too difficult? Maven generates GOM using the "maven gump" goal. Yes, Gump could read POM, but since Maven does this so nicely it isn't a top priority on my list. I beleive Brett suggested he'd start looking at making the goal use <maven not <ant, but in my perfect would we'd have it generate two projects -- one with <ant and one with <maven for testing/verification. > I think its planned. One big difficulty (there are several) is that the > names of the projects in maven are not the same as the names of the > projects in gump. I think many are close, and I think (as I'm sure you do) that we just need to go through the process to find the odd ones out. Having the same names will help us. regards Adam --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
