[Lift] Re: NetBeans is barfing on the new pom.xml structure
Thanks David, that's pretty much the plan for me too. If you come across something out of the way in the current build configs, feel free to point them. It would be very helpful. Cheers, Indrajit On 25/10/09 12:26 AM, David Bernard wrote: > > At work, I configure the root pom.xml with (increase size of parent > pom.xml but define the rules for every children (idem for > dependencies)) > > > > >org.scala-tools >maven-scala-plugin >2.12.2 > > >org.codehaus.mojo >buildnumber-maven-plugin >1.0-beta-2 > > >org.apache.maven.plugins >maven-eclipse-plugin >2.6 > > >net.alchim31.maven >maven-basicwebstart-plugin >0.2 > > >org.jvnet.maven.incrementalbuild >incremental-build-plugin >1.2 > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 18:55, Indrajit Raychaudhuri > wrote: >> >> Thanks davidB for pointing! >> >> On 24/10/09 9:19 PM, David Bernard wrote: >>> >>> Not setting version of plugin : >>> * create un-reproductible build (over time and developer configuration). >> >> Just found this one too: >> http://www.mail-archive.com/d...@maven.apache.org/msg82398.html. I had no >> idea that the notion of RELEASE can be unsafe. Have seen this in quite a >> few OSS project for sure. >> >>> * using le last release is not always a good idea (eg : the last 2 >>> version of maven-eclipse-plugin introduce regression). >> >> Indeed, for odd plugins we might have to do this. But that won't have >> affected every other configuration. At least that was the plan. >> >> As mentioned, I'll go ahead and add the version property for extensions >> and plugins. >> >> BTW, what is the recommended version for maven-eclipse-plugin? I'll set >> that accordingly. >> >>> >>> /davidB >>> >>> >>> On 2009-10-24, Indrajit Raychaudhuriwrote: Plugin and extension versions are optional in Maven pom. Not providing the version has a small advantage - it defaults to RELEASE and pulls up the latest release automatically. While it's possible that a plugin version would have backward incomplete changes, in Lift we hardly do anything complicated to be affected drastically. We could always 'pin' a version for the odd plugins that were affected. Thus, I wanted to give that a go. This works well from the CLI (typically what I use for build). The intent for tweaking the poms were primarily to: - reduce the size of pom by discarding the optional/default settings - remove redundant settings in multiple pom - add some inline docu to stop one running away from a pom.xml - contribute a little in making maven not 'download the internet' Too bad the IDEs are not co-operating! Thanks Kris/David for raising this. I am going to add versions for all the plugins and extensions tonight. Unstable pom.xml is the last thing we want (even if that means redundant/optional settings make their way into the poms). Cheers, Indrajit On 24/10/09 7:22 AM, Kris Nuttycombe wrote: > > I ran into that -it's a missing version number in the root pom. Fixed > in my kjn-loc-wip branch if you just want to grab it from there. > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 3:41 PM, David Pollak > wrote: >> Folks, >> >> Any idea why NetBeans doesn't like the new Lift pom structure? >> >> Thanks, >> >> David >> >> -- >> Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net >> Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890 >> Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp >> Surf the harmonics >> >>> >> > >> > >>> >> >>> >> > > > --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Lift] Re: NetBeans is barfing on the new pom.xml structure
Just want to mention that m2eclipse also had a problem. Thanks for addressing it. - Indrajit Raychaudhuri wrote: Plugin and extension versions are optional in Maven pom. Not providing the version has a small advantage - it defaults to RELEASE and pulls up the latest release automatically. While it's possible that a plugin version would have backward incomplete changes, in Lift we hardly do anything complicated to be affected drastically. We could always 'pin' a version for the odd plugins that were affected. Thus, I wanted to give that a go. This works well from the CLI (typically what I use for build). The intent for tweaking the poms were primarily to: - reduce the size of pom by discarding the optional/default settings - remove redundant settings in multiple pom - add some inline docu to stop one running away from a pom.xml - contribute a little in making maven not 'download the internet' Too bad the IDEs are not co-operating! Thanks Kris/David for raising this. I am going to add versions for all the plugins and extensions tonight. Unstable pom.xml is the last thing we want (even if that means redundant/optional settings make their way into the poms). Cheers, Indrajit On 24/10/09 7:22 AM, Kris Nuttycombe wrote: > > I ran into that -it's a missing version number in the root pom. Fixed > in my kjn-loc-wip branch if you just want to grab it from there. > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 3:41 PM, David Pollak > wrote: >> Folks, >> >> Any idea why NetBeans doesn't like the new Lift pom structure? >> >> Thanks, >> >> David >> >> -- >> Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net >> Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890 >> Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp >> Surf the harmonics >> >>> >> > > > --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Lift] Re: NetBeans is barfing on the new pom.xml structure
At work, I configure the root pom.xml with (increase size of parent pom.xml but define the rules for every children (idem for dependencies)) org.scala-tools maven-scala-plugin 2.12.2 org.codehaus.mojo buildnumber-maven-plugin 1.0-beta-2 org.apache.maven.plugins maven-eclipse-plugin 2.6 net.alchim31.maven maven-basicwebstart-plugin 0.2 org.jvnet.maven.incrementalbuild incremental-build-plugin 1.2 On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 18:55, Indrajit Raychaudhuri wrote: > > Thanks davidB for pointing! > > On 24/10/09 9:19 PM, David Bernard wrote: >> >> Not setting version of plugin : >> * create un-reproductible build (over time and developer configuration). > > Just found this one too: > http://www.mail-archive.com/d...@maven.apache.org/msg82398.html. I had no > idea that the notion of RELEASE can be unsafe. Have seen this in quite a > few OSS project for sure. > >> * using le last release is not always a good idea (eg : the last 2 >> version of maven-eclipse-plugin introduce regression). > > Indeed, for odd plugins we might have to do this. But that won't have > affected every other configuration. At least that was the plan. > > As mentioned, I'll go ahead and add the version property for extensions > and plugins. > > BTW, what is the recommended version for maven-eclipse-plugin? I'll set > that accordingly. > >> >> /davidB >> >> >> On 2009-10-24, Indrajit Raychaudhuri wrote: >>> >>> Plugin and extension versions are optional in Maven pom. Not providing >>> the version has a small advantage - it defaults to RELEASE and pulls up >>> the latest release automatically. >>> >>> While it's possible that a plugin version would have backward incomplete >>> changes, in Lift we hardly do anything complicated to be affected >>> drastically. We could always 'pin' a version for the odd plugins that >>> were affected. Thus, I wanted to give that a go. This works well from >>> the CLI (typically what I use for build). >>> >>> The intent for tweaking the poms were primarily to: >>> - reduce the size of pom by discarding the optional/default settings >>> - remove redundant settings in multiple pom >>> - add some inline docu to stop one running away from a pom.xml >>> - contribute a little in making maven not 'download the internet' >>> >>> Too bad the IDEs are not co-operating! Thanks Kris/David for raising >>> this. I am going to add versions for all the plugins and extensions >>> tonight. Unstable pom.xml is the last thing we want (even if that means >>> redundant/optional settings make their way into the poms). >>> >>> Cheers, Indrajit >>> >>> >>> On 24/10/09 7:22 AM, Kris Nuttycombe wrote: I ran into that -it's a missing version number in the root pom. Fixed in my kjn-loc-wip branch if you just want to grab it from there. On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 3:41 PM, David Pollak wrote: > Folks, > > Any idea why NetBeans doesn't like the new Lift pom structure? > > Thanks, > > David > > -- > Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net > Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890 > Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp > Surf the harmonics > >> > > >>> >>> >> >> > > > > > --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Lift] Re: NetBeans is barfing on the new pom.xml structure
Thanks davidB for pointing! On 24/10/09 9:19 PM, David Bernard wrote: > > Not setting version of plugin : > * create un-reproductible build (over time and developer configuration). Just found this one too: http://www.mail-archive.com/d...@maven.apache.org/msg82398.html. I had no idea that the notion of RELEASE can be unsafe. Have seen this in quite a few OSS project for sure. > * using le last release is not always a good idea (eg : the last 2 > version of maven-eclipse-plugin introduce regression). Indeed, for odd plugins we might have to do this. But that won't have affected every other configuration. At least that was the plan. As mentioned, I'll go ahead and add the version property for extensions and plugins. BTW, what is the recommended version for maven-eclipse-plugin? I'll set that accordingly. > > /davidB > > > On 2009-10-24, Indrajit Raychaudhuri wrote: >> >> Plugin and extension versions are optional in Maven pom. Not providing >> the version has a small advantage - it defaults to RELEASE and pulls up >> the latest release automatically. >> >> While it's possible that a plugin version would have backward incomplete >> changes, in Lift we hardly do anything complicated to be affected >> drastically. We could always 'pin' a version for the odd plugins that >> were affected. Thus, I wanted to give that a go. This works well from >> the CLI (typically what I use for build). >> >> The intent for tweaking the poms were primarily to: >> - reduce the size of pom by discarding the optional/default settings >> - remove redundant settings in multiple pom >> - add some inline docu to stop one running away from a pom.xml >> - contribute a little in making maven not 'download the internet' >> >> Too bad the IDEs are not co-operating! Thanks Kris/David for raising >> this. I am going to add versions for all the plugins and extensions >> tonight. Unstable pom.xml is the last thing we want (even if that means >> redundant/optional settings make their way into the poms). >> >> Cheers, Indrajit >> >> >> On 24/10/09 7:22 AM, Kris Nuttycombe wrote: >>> >>> I ran into that -it's a missing version number in the root pom. Fixed >>> in my kjn-loc-wip branch if you just want to grab it from there. >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 3:41 PM, David Pollak >>>wrote: Folks, Any idea why NetBeans doesn't like the new Lift pom structure? Thanks, David -- Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890 Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp Surf the harmonics > >>> >> >>> >> > > > --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Lift] Re: NetBeans is barfing on the new pom.xml structure
Not setting version of plugin : * create un-reproductible build (over time and developer configuration). * using le last release is not always a good idea (eg : the last 2 version of maven-eclipse-plugin introduce regression). /davidB On 2009-10-24, Indrajit Raychaudhuri wrote: > > Plugin and extension versions are optional in Maven pom. Not providing > the version has a small advantage - it defaults to RELEASE and pulls up > the latest release automatically. > > While it's possible that a plugin version would have backward incomplete > changes, in Lift we hardly do anything complicated to be affected > drastically. We could always 'pin' a version for the odd plugins that > were affected. Thus, I wanted to give that a go. This works well from > the CLI (typically what I use for build). > > The intent for tweaking the poms were primarily to: > - reduce the size of pom by discarding the optional/default settings > - remove redundant settings in multiple pom > - add some inline docu to stop one running away from a pom.xml > - contribute a little in making maven not 'download the internet' > > Too bad the IDEs are not co-operating! Thanks Kris/David for raising > this. I am going to add versions for all the plugins and extensions > tonight. Unstable pom.xml is the last thing we want (even if that means > redundant/optional settings make their way into the poms). > > Cheers, Indrajit > > > On 24/10/09 7:22 AM, Kris Nuttycombe wrote: >> >> I ran into that -it's a missing version number in the root pom. Fixed >> in my kjn-loc-wip branch if you just want to grab it from there. >> >> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 3:41 PM, David Pollak >> wrote: >>> Folks, >>> >>> Any idea why NetBeans doesn't like the new Lift pom structure? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> David >>> >>> -- >>> Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net >>> Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890 >>> Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp >>> Surf the harmonics >>> >>> >> >> > > > > > --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Lift] Re: NetBeans is barfing on the new pom.xml structure
Plugin and extension versions are optional in Maven pom. Not providing the version has a small advantage - it defaults to RELEASE and pulls up the latest release automatically. While it's possible that a plugin version would have backward incomplete changes, in Lift we hardly do anything complicated to be affected drastically. We could always 'pin' a version for the odd plugins that were affected. Thus, I wanted to give that a go. This works well from the CLI (typically what I use for build). The intent for tweaking the poms were primarily to: - reduce the size of pom by discarding the optional/default settings - remove redundant settings in multiple pom - add some inline docu to stop one running away from a pom.xml - contribute a little in making maven not 'download the internet' Too bad the IDEs are not co-operating! Thanks Kris/David for raising this. I am going to add versions for all the plugins and extensions tonight. Unstable pom.xml is the last thing we want (even if that means redundant/optional settings make their way into the poms). Cheers, Indrajit On 24/10/09 7:22 AM, Kris Nuttycombe wrote: > > I ran into that -it's a missing version number in the root pom. Fixed > in my kjn-loc-wip branch if you just want to grab it from there. > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 3:41 PM, David Pollak > wrote: >> Folks, >> >> Any idea why NetBeans doesn't like the new Lift pom structure? >> >> Thanks, >> >> David >> >> -- >> Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net >> Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890 >> Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp >> Surf the harmonics >> >>> >> > > > --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Lift] Re: NetBeans is barfing on the new pom.xml structure
I ran into that -it's a missing version number in the root pom. Fixed in my kjn-loc-wip branch if you just want to grab it from there. On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 3:41 PM, David Pollak wrote: > Folks, > > Any idea why NetBeans doesn't like the new Lift pom structure? > > Thanks, > > David > > -- > Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net > Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890 > Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp > Surf the harmonics > > > > --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
