On Sat, 2005-08-20 at 17:05 +0200, Jochen Wiedmann wrote: > robert burrell donkin wrote: > > > i'm willing to take a look at this but it might take a day or two. is > > there any reason why we couldn't use maven generated ant build scripts > > for gump till then? > > Basically, that's a good idea. On the other hand, one should keep in > mind, that we now have one multiproject and several subprojects, that > would need to recreate Ant scripts, whenever the Maven configuration > changes. I'd prefer to avoid that additional maintenance step.
the ant scripts may turn out to be a convenient way to manage the transition. i'm still a little unsure about the plan. AIUI we have a mavenised build on the MAVEN branch which has the changes made to trunk ported into it. so it's currently the same as trunk but uses maven. is this right? what's stopping copying MAVEN into trunk ATM? is the plan to alter the gump meta-data so that it uses the MAVEN branch first and then change it to use trunk later? it won't take very long to modify the gump meta-data but (experience has proved) that it may take many days of fixing before gump will work correctly. in other words, i think it unlikely that it'll be possible to make transition without breaking gump. so, i'm not sure there's much to gained by waiting. > In other words, waiting "a day or two" sounds *much* better. :-) i should have said: it'll be a few days once i have the mavenised build running reliably on my machine :-/ i'm still having problems making the maven build run. this is a little bit of a bad sign since AIUI gump uses a reasonably standard maven. - robert
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
