Re: [VOTE] Packaging with maven
+1 Patrick, you and I were writing at the same time. Gotta stop that. ;-) Craig On May 7, 2007, at 9:35 AM, Patrick Linskey wrote: directory, since I don't think Maven much cares what the name of the directory in which the parent module resides (I doubt it even ever looks at it). I.e., it would be located at http://svn.apache.org/ I think you're probably right -- currently, the dir is named 'trunk', for example. looks at it). I.e., it would be located at http://svn.apache.org/ repos/asf/openjpa/trunk/openjpa/openjpa. Isn't that one too many 'openjpa' tokens? Couldn't it just be http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/trunk/openjpa, instead of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/trunk/openjpa-all? -Patrick On 5/7/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Patrick raises a good point. Also, we might also be able to just have the "openjpa" aggregate jar module be in a sub-directory named "openjpa" without having to rename the parent module's enclosing directory, since I don't think Maven much cares what the name of the directory in which the parent module resides (I doubt it even ever looks at it). I.e., it would be located at http://svn.apache.org/ repos/asf/openjpa/trunk/openjpa/openjpa. How does that sound? On May 7, 2007, at 9:15 AM, Patrick Linskey wrote: > I think it makes sense to rename dirs as appropriate. Remember that > once we graduate, we'll be moving repositories anyways, so it would > seem like a good opportunity to make structural changes. > > -Patrick > > On 5/7/07, Michael Dick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> +1 >> >> What would the impact be if we renamed openjpa-all to openjpa? >> >> We could change our checkout instructions to read >> svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/openjpa/ >> trunkopenjpa-parent >> and then the directories match the artifactId's in pom.xml. >> >> The only reason I think this is worth doing is to avoid confusion >> for new >> developers down the road. It's just one more thing that we have to >> remember >> and explain. Maybe there's an impact to changing the directory >> name that I >> missed though. >> >> -Mike >> >> On 5/6/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: >> > >> > >> > Poking around the ActiveMQ pom.xml files, I notice that you can >> have >> > a different artifactId than the module name (i.e., directory) >> you are >> > in. I hadn't known you could do this. >> > >> > Currently, our artifacts name are: >> > >> >trunk/pom.xml: openjpa >> >trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa-all >> >trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: openjpa-project >> > >> > We could change these to: >> > >> >trunk/pom.xml: openjpa-parent >> >trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa >> >trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: apache-openjpa >> > >> > I've tested this out, and it results in the openjpa aggregate jar >> > being named "openjpa-VERSION.jar", the dependency being simply >> named >> > "openjpa", and the assembly is named "apache-openjpa- VERSION.zip ". >> > None of the directories needed to be renamed. I've attached the >> patch >> > that does this to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ OPENJPA-194 >> > >> > Since this will mess up people who currently have maven >> dependencies >> > on OpenJPA (i.e., people who depend on "openjpa-all" will now >> need to >> > depend on "openjpa"), we should probably get this hammered out >> before >> > leaving incubation. So I've gone ahead and turned the [DISCUSS] >> into >> > a [VOTE] to see if we should go ahead and do this. >> > >> > A vote of +1 means we should do the renaming, -1 means we should >> not, >> > and 0 means "don't care". The vote will remain open until Wednesday >> > May 9th at 23:59 GMT. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On May 4, 2007, at 6:55 AM, Michael Dick wrote: >> > >> > > Some comments below >> > > >> > > On 5/4/07, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: >> > >> >> > >> I'd like reopen the discussion on how to package and name our >> > >> artifacts. I think the current setup could be improved, to >> give a >> > >> better experience for users who might not be using maven for >> > >> dependency management. It's easy for us to change now before >> > >> graduation because once we graduate, people will need to >> update their >> > >> dependencies anyway so there are no backward compatibility >> issues. >> > >> >> > >> The name of the single jar that has all of the openjpa stuff >> in it >> > >> except for the documentation and examples is currently called >> > >> openjpa- >> > >> all. This name is confusing because unless they RTFM, people >> don't >> > >> really know that it's not all the code you need, just all the >> jpa >> > >> code. So I'd like to call this artifact openjpa. >> > > >> > > >> > > +1 >> > > >> > > But we already have a project with that name, and that project >> builds >> > >> the distributions. So I'd rename the current openjpa to >> openjpa-dist. >> > >> Its ultimate destination in the Apache mirror structure is under >> > >> www.apa
Re: [VOTE] Packaging with maven
I agree that it doesn't matter what we call the openjpa-parent directory. Trunk is ok. But I do think we should rename the openjpa-all to openjpa to be consistent with the artifact name and location in the directory structure. The difference in my mind is that the openjpa-parent isn't an artifact that we ship. On May 7, 2007, at 9:26 AM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote: Patrick raises a good point. Also, we might also be able to just have the "openjpa" aggregate jar module be in a sub-directory named "openjpa" without having to rename the parent module's enclosing directory, since I don't think Maven much cares what the name of the directory in which the parent module resides (I doubt it even ever looks at it). I.e., it would be located at http:// svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/trunk/openjpa/openjpa. I'm confused now. The trunk has openjpa-kernel, openjpa-all, and all the other directories each of which is a maven project. I'd propose simply renaming trunk/openjpa-all to trunk/openjpa to match the artifactId of the aggregate jar. And we still need to decide on the artifactId and directory name for openjpa-project. Craig How does that sound? On May 7, 2007, at 9:15 AM, Patrick Linskey wrote: I think it makes sense to rename dirs as appropriate. Remember that once we graduate, we'll be moving repositories anyways, so it would seem like a good opportunity to make structural changes. -Patrick On 5/7/07, Michael Dick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: +1 What would the impact be if we renamed openjpa-all to openjpa? We could change our checkout instructions to read svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/openjpa/ trunkopenjpa-parent and then the directories match the artifactId's in pom.xml. The only reason I think this is worth doing is to avoid confusion for new developers down the road. It's just one more thing that we have to remember and explain. Maybe there's an impact to changing the directory name that I missed though. -Mike On 5/6/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > Poking around the ActiveMQ pom.xml files, I notice that you can have > a different artifactId than the module name (i.e., directory) you are > in. I hadn't known you could do this. > > Currently, our artifacts name are: > >trunk/pom.xml: openjpa >trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa-all >trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: openjpa-project > > We could change these to: > >trunk/pom.xml: openjpa-parent >trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa >trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: apache-openjpa > > I've tested this out, and it results in the openjpa aggregate jar > being named "openjpa-VERSION.jar", the dependency being simply named > "openjpa", and the assembly is named "apache-openjpa- VERSION.zip ". > None of the directories needed to be renamed. I've attached the patch > that does this to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ OPENJPA-194 > > Since this will mess up people who currently have maven dependencies > on OpenJPA (i.e., people who depend on "openjpa-all" will now need to > depend on "openjpa"), we should probably get this hammered out before > leaving incubation. So I've gone ahead and turned the [DISCUSS] into > a [VOTE] to see if we should go ahead and do this. > > A vote of +1 means we should do the renaming, -1 means we should not, > and 0 means "don't care". The vote will remain open until Wednesday > May 9th at 23:59 GMT. > > > > > On May 4, 2007, at 6:55 AM, Michael Dick wrote: > > > Some comments below > > > > On 5/4/07, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > >> > >> I'd like reopen the discussion on how to package and name our > >> artifacts. I think the current setup could be improved, to give a > >> better experience for users who might not be using maven for > >> dependency management. It's easy for us to change now before > >> graduation because once we graduate, people will need to update their > >> dependencies anyway so there are no backward compatibility issues. > >> > >> The name of the single jar that has all of the openjpa stuff in it > >> except for the documentation and examples is currently called > >> openjpa- > >> all. This name is confusing because unless they RTFM, people don't > >> really know that it's not all the code you need, just all the jpa > >> code. So I'd like to call this artifact openjpa. > > > > > > +1 > > > > But we already have a project with that name, and that project builds > >> the distributions. So I'd rename the current openjpa to openjpa-dist. > >> Its ultimate destination in the Apache mirror structure is under > >> www.apache.org/dist/openjpa once we graduate, so having dist in the > >> project name helps understanding that this project builds the > >> artifacts that go into dist. Separate from the artifacts that are > >> published via maven. > > > > > > +1 > > > > Finally, the openjpa-all jar includes its subcomponents as > >> depe
Re: [VOTE] Packaging with maven
On May 7, 2007, at 9:35 AM, Patrick Linskey wrote: Isn't that one too many 'openjpa' tokens? Couldn't it just be http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/trunk/openjpa, instead of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/trunk/openjpa-all? Yes, you're right.
Re: [VOTE] Packaging with maven
directory, since I don't think Maven much cares what the name of the directory in which the parent module resides (I doubt it even ever looks at it). I.e., it would be located at http://svn.apache.org/ I think you're probably right -- currently, the dir is named 'trunk', for example. looks at it). I.e., it would be located at http://svn.apache.org/ repos/asf/openjpa/trunk/openjpa/openjpa. Isn't that one too many 'openjpa' tokens? Couldn't it just be http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/trunk/openjpa, instead of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/trunk/openjpa-all? -Patrick On 5/7/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Patrick raises a good point. Also, we might also be able to just have the "openjpa" aggregate jar module be in a sub-directory named "openjpa" without having to rename the parent module's enclosing directory, since I don't think Maven much cares what the name of the directory in which the parent module resides (I doubt it even ever looks at it). I.e., it would be located at http://svn.apache.org/ repos/asf/openjpa/trunk/openjpa/openjpa. How does that sound? On May 7, 2007, at 9:15 AM, Patrick Linskey wrote: > I think it makes sense to rename dirs as appropriate. Remember that > once we graduate, we'll be moving repositories anyways, so it would > seem like a good opportunity to make structural changes. > > -Patrick > > On 5/7/07, Michael Dick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> +1 >> >> What would the impact be if we renamed openjpa-all to openjpa? >> >> We could change our checkout instructions to read >> svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/openjpa/ >> trunkopenjpa-parent >> and then the directories match the artifactId's in pom.xml. >> >> The only reason I think this is worth doing is to avoid confusion >> for new >> developers down the road. It's just one more thing that we have to >> remember >> and explain. Maybe there's an impact to changing the directory >> name that I >> missed though. >> >> -Mike >> >> On 5/6/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: >> > >> > >> > Poking around the ActiveMQ pom.xml files, I notice that you can >> have >> > a different artifactId than the module name (i.e., directory) >> you are >> > in. I hadn't known you could do this. >> > >> > Currently, our artifacts name are: >> > >> >trunk/pom.xml: openjpa >> >trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa-all >> >trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: openjpa-project >> > >> > We could change these to: >> > >> >trunk/pom.xml: openjpa-parent >> >trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa >> >trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: apache-openjpa >> > >> > I've tested this out, and it results in the openjpa aggregate jar >> > being named "openjpa-VERSION.jar", the dependency being simply >> named >> > "openjpa", and the assembly is named "apache-openjpa-VERSION.zip ". >> > None of the directories needed to be renamed. I've attached the >> patch >> > that does this to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-194 >> > >> > Since this will mess up people who currently have maven >> dependencies >> > on OpenJPA (i.e., people who depend on "openjpa-all" will now >> need to >> > depend on "openjpa"), we should probably get this hammered out >> before >> > leaving incubation. So I've gone ahead and turned the [DISCUSS] >> into >> > a [VOTE] to see if we should go ahead and do this. >> > >> > A vote of +1 means we should do the renaming, -1 means we should >> not, >> > and 0 means "don't care". The vote will remain open until Wednesday >> > May 9th at 23:59 GMT. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On May 4, 2007, at 6:55 AM, Michael Dick wrote: >> > >> > > Some comments below >> > > >> > > On 5/4/07, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: >> > >> >> > >> I'd like reopen the discussion on how to package and name our >> > >> artifacts. I think the current setup could be improved, to >> give a >> > >> better experience for users who might not be using maven for >> > >> dependency management. It's easy for us to change now before >> > >> graduation because once we graduate, people will need to >> update their >> > >> dependencies anyway so there are no backward compatibility >> issues. >> > >> >> > >> The name of the single jar that has all of the openjpa stuff >> in it >> > >> except for the documentation and examples is currently called >> > >> openjpa- >> > >> all. This name is confusing because unless they RTFM, people >> don't >> > >> really know that it's not all the code you need, just all the >> jpa >> > >> code. So I'd like to call this artifact openjpa. >> > > >> > > >> > > +1 >> > > >> > > But we already have a project with that name, and that project >> builds >> > >> the distributions. So I'd rename the current openjpa to >> openjpa-dist. >> > >> Its ultimate destination in the Apache mirror structure is under >> > >> www.apache.org/dist/openjpa once we graduate, so having dist >> in the >> > >> project name helps understanding that this project builds the >> > >> artifacts
Re: [VOTE] Packaging with maven
Patrick raises a good point. Also, we might also be able to just have the "openjpa" aggregate jar module be in a sub-directory named "openjpa" without having to rename the parent module's enclosing directory, since I don't think Maven much cares what the name of the directory in which the parent module resides (I doubt it even ever looks at it). I.e., it would be located at http://svn.apache.org/ repos/asf/openjpa/trunk/openjpa/openjpa. How does that sound? On May 7, 2007, at 9:15 AM, Patrick Linskey wrote: I think it makes sense to rename dirs as appropriate. Remember that once we graduate, we'll be moving repositories anyways, so it would seem like a good opportunity to make structural changes. -Patrick On 5/7/07, Michael Dick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: +1 What would the impact be if we renamed openjpa-all to openjpa? We could change our checkout instructions to read svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/openjpa/ trunkopenjpa-parent and then the directories match the artifactId's in pom.xml. The only reason I think this is worth doing is to avoid confusion for new developers down the road. It's just one more thing that we have to remember and explain. Maybe there's an impact to changing the directory name that I missed though. -Mike On 5/6/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > Poking around the ActiveMQ pom.xml files, I notice that you can have > a different artifactId than the module name (i.e., directory) you are > in. I hadn't known you could do this. > > Currently, our artifacts name are: > >trunk/pom.xml: openjpa >trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa-all >trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: openjpa-project > > We could change these to: > >trunk/pom.xml: openjpa-parent >trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa >trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: apache-openjpa > > I've tested this out, and it results in the openjpa aggregate jar > being named "openjpa-VERSION.jar", the dependency being simply named > "openjpa", and the assembly is named "apache-openjpa-VERSION.zip ". > None of the directories needed to be renamed. I've attached the patch > that does this to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-194 > > Since this will mess up people who currently have maven dependencies > on OpenJPA (i.e., people who depend on "openjpa-all" will now need to > depend on "openjpa"), we should probably get this hammered out before > leaving incubation. So I've gone ahead and turned the [DISCUSS] into > a [VOTE] to see if we should go ahead and do this. > > A vote of +1 means we should do the renaming, -1 means we should not, > and 0 means "don't care". The vote will remain open until Wednesday > May 9th at 23:59 GMT. > > > > > On May 4, 2007, at 6:55 AM, Michael Dick wrote: > > > Some comments below > > > > On 5/4/07, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > >> > >> I'd like reopen the discussion on how to package and name our > >> artifacts. I think the current setup could be improved, to give a > >> better experience for users who might not be using maven for > >> dependency management. It's easy for us to change now before > >> graduation because once we graduate, people will need to update their > >> dependencies anyway so there are no backward compatibility issues. > >> > >> The name of the single jar that has all of the openjpa stuff in it > >> except for the documentation and examples is currently called > >> openjpa- > >> all. This name is confusing because unless they RTFM, people don't > >> really know that it's not all the code you need, just all the jpa > >> code. So I'd like to call this artifact openjpa. > > > > > > +1 > > > > But we already have a project with that name, and that project builds > >> the distributions. So I'd rename the current openjpa to openjpa-dist. > >> Its ultimate destination in the Apache mirror structure is under > >> www.apache.org/dist/openjpa once we graduate, so having dist in the > >> project name helps understanding that this project builds the > >> artifacts that go into dist. Separate from the artifacts that are > >> published via maven. > > > > > > +1 > > > > Finally, the openjpa-all jar includes its subcomponents as > >> dependencies. I think this is wrong, since you end up with a class > >> path with openjpa-all.jar as well as openjpa-kernel.jar and all the > >> others. > > > > > > I would like to change this too. I did a little experimenting and > > it looks > > like the dependencies aren't needed in openjpa-all, but they are > > needed for > > openjpa-project (to populate the lib directory). Moving the > > dependencies > > into openjpa-project should be safe. > > > > We're also going to need to change the deploy logic to strip out the > > -project suffix from the zip files. We've talked about it before > > when I was > > releasing 0.9.7 (and before that when Marc was working on 0.9.6), > > but I > > haven't had time to look in
Re: [VOTE] Packaging with maven
I think it makes sense to rename dirs as appropriate. Remember that once we graduate, we'll be moving repositories anyways, so it would seem like a good opportunity to make structural changes. -Patrick On 5/7/07, Michael Dick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: +1 What would the impact be if we renamed openjpa-all to openjpa? We could change our checkout instructions to read svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/openjpa/trunkopenjpa-parent and then the directories match the artifactId's in pom.xml. The only reason I think this is worth doing is to avoid confusion for new developers down the road. It's just one more thing that we have to remember and explain. Maybe there's an impact to changing the directory name that I missed though. -Mike On 5/6/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > Poking around the ActiveMQ pom.xml files, I notice that you can have > a different artifactId than the module name (i.e., directory) you are > in. I hadn't known you could do this. > > Currently, our artifacts name are: > >trunk/pom.xml: openjpa >trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa-all >trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: openjpa-project > > We could change these to: > >trunk/pom.xml: openjpa-parent >trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa >trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: apache-openjpa > > I've tested this out, and it results in the openjpa aggregate jar > being named "openjpa-VERSION.jar", the dependency being simply named > "openjpa", and the assembly is named "apache-openjpa-VERSION.zip ". > None of the directories needed to be renamed. I've attached the patch > that does this to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-194 > > Since this will mess up people who currently have maven dependencies > on OpenJPA (i.e., people who depend on "openjpa-all" will now need to > depend on "openjpa"), we should probably get this hammered out before > leaving incubation. So I've gone ahead and turned the [DISCUSS] into > a [VOTE] to see if we should go ahead and do this. > > A vote of +1 means we should do the renaming, -1 means we should not, > and 0 means "don't care". The vote will remain open until Wednesday > May 9th at 23:59 GMT. > > > > > On May 4, 2007, at 6:55 AM, Michael Dick wrote: > > > Some comments below > > > > On 5/4/07, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > >> > >> I'd like reopen the discussion on how to package and name our > >> artifacts. I think the current setup could be improved, to give a > >> better experience for users who might not be using maven for > >> dependency management. It's easy for us to change now before > >> graduation because once we graduate, people will need to update their > >> dependencies anyway so there are no backward compatibility issues. > >> > >> The name of the single jar that has all of the openjpa stuff in it > >> except for the documentation and examples is currently called > >> openjpa- > >> all. This name is confusing because unless they RTFM, people don't > >> really know that it's not all the code you need, just all the jpa > >> code. So I'd like to call this artifact openjpa. > > > > > > +1 > > > > But we already have a project with that name, and that project builds > >> the distributions. So I'd rename the current openjpa to openjpa-dist. > >> Its ultimate destination in the Apache mirror structure is under > >> www.apache.org/dist/openjpa once we graduate, so having dist in the > >> project name helps understanding that this project builds the > >> artifacts that go into dist. Separate from the artifacts that are > >> published via maven. > > > > > > +1 > > > > Finally, the openjpa-all jar includes its subcomponents as > >> dependencies. I think this is wrong, since you end up with a class > >> path with openjpa-all.jar as well as openjpa-kernel.jar and all the > >> others. > > > > > > I would like to change this too. I did a little experimenting and > > it looks > > like the dependencies aren't needed in openjpa-all, but they are > > needed for > > openjpa-project (to populate the lib directory). Moving the > > dependencies > > into openjpa-project should be safe. > > > > We're also going to need to change the deploy logic to strip out the > > -project suffix from the zip files. We've talked about it before > > when I was > > releasing 0.9.7 (and before that when Marc was working on 0.9.6), > > but I > > haven't had time to look into it. It should be fairly easy to make the > > change. > > > > > > Thoughts? > >> > >> Craig > >> > >> Craig Russell > >> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/ > >> jdo > >> 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! > >> > >> > >> > > -Michael Dick > > -- Patrick Linskey 202 669 5907
Re: [VOTE] Packaging with maven
+1 What would the impact be if we renamed openjpa-all to openjpa? We could change our checkout instructions to read svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/openjpa/trunkopenjpa-parent and then the directories match the artifactId's in pom.xml. The only reason I think this is worth doing is to avoid confusion for new developers down the road. It's just one more thing that we have to remember and explain. Maybe there's an impact to changing the directory name that I missed though. -Mike On 5/6/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: Poking around the ActiveMQ pom.xml files, I notice that you can have a different artifactId than the module name (i.e., directory) you are in. I hadn't known you could do this. Currently, our artifacts name are: trunk/pom.xml: openjpa trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa-all trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: openjpa-project We could change these to: trunk/pom.xml: openjpa-parent trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: apache-openjpa I've tested this out, and it results in the openjpa aggregate jar being named "openjpa-VERSION.jar", the dependency being simply named "openjpa", and the assembly is named "apache-openjpa-VERSION.zip ". None of the directories needed to be renamed. I've attached the patch that does this to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-194 Since this will mess up people who currently have maven dependencies on OpenJPA (i.e., people who depend on "openjpa-all" will now need to depend on "openjpa"), we should probably get this hammered out before leaving incubation. So I've gone ahead and turned the [DISCUSS] into a [VOTE] to see if we should go ahead and do this. A vote of +1 means we should do the renaming, -1 means we should not, and 0 means "don't care". The vote will remain open until Wednesday May 9th at 23:59 GMT. On May 4, 2007, at 6:55 AM, Michael Dick wrote: > Some comments below > > On 5/4/07, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: >> >> I'd like reopen the discussion on how to package and name our >> artifacts. I think the current setup could be improved, to give a >> better experience for users who might not be using maven for >> dependency management. It's easy for us to change now before >> graduation because once we graduate, people will need to update their >> dependencies anyway so there are no backward compatibility issues. >> >> The name of the single jar that has all of the openjpa stuff in it >> except for the documentation and examples is currently called >> openjpa- >> all. This name is confusing because unless they RTFM, people don't >> really know that it's not all the code you need, just all the jpa >> code. So I'd like to call this artifact openjpa. > > > +1 > > But we already have a project with that name, and that project builds >> the distributions. So I'd rename the current openjpa to openjpa-dist. >> Its ultimate destination in the Apache mirror structure is under >> www.apache.org/dist/openjpa once we graduate, so having dist in the >> project name helps understanding that this project builds the >> artifacts that go into dist. Separate from the artifacts that are >> published via maven. > > > +1 > > Finally, the openjpa-all jar includes its subcomponents as >> dependencies. I think this is wrong, since you end up with a class >> path with openjpa-all.jar as well as openjpa-kernel.jar and all the >> others. > > > I would like to change this too. I did a little experimenting and > it looks > like the dependencies aren't needed in openjpa-all, but they are > needed for > openjpa-project (to populate the lib directory). Moving the > dependencies > into openjpa-project should be safe. > > We're also going to need to change the deploy logic to strip out the > -project suffix from the zip files. We've talked about it before > when I was > releasing 0.9.7 (and before that when Marc was working on 0.9.6), > but I > haven't had time to look into it. It should be fairly easy to make the > change. > > > Thoughts? >> >> Craig >> >> Craig Russell >> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/ >> jdo >> 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! >> >> >> > -Michael Dick
RE: [VOTE] Packaging with maven
+1 good idea -Original Message- From: Marc Prud'hommeaux [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marc Prud'hommeaux Sent: May 6, 2007 5:27 PM To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] Packaging with maven Poking around the ActiveMQ pom.xml files, I notice that you can have a different artifactId than the module name (i.e., directory) you are in. I hadn't known you could do this. Currently, our artifacts name are: trunk/pom.xml: openjpa trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa-all trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: openjpa-project We could change these to: trunk/pom.xml: openjpa-parent trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: apache-openjpa I've tested this out, and it results in the openjpa aggregate jar being named "openjpa-VERSION.jar", the dependency being simply named "openjpa", and the assembly is named "apache-openjpa-VERSION.zip". None of the directories needed to be renamed. I've attached the patch that does this to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-194 Since this will mess up people who currently have maven dependencies on OpenJPA (i.e., people who depend on "openjpa-all" will now need to depend on "openjpa"), we should probably get this hammered out before leaving incubation. So I've gone ahead and turned the [DISCUSS] into a [VOTE] to see if we should go ahead and do this. A vote of +1 means we should do the renaming, -1 means we should not, and 0 means "don't care". The vote will remain open until Wednesday May 9th at 23:59 GMT. On May 4, 2007, at 6:55 AM, Michael Dick wrote: > Some comments below > > On 5/4/07, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I'd like reopen the discussion on how to package and name our >> artifacts. I think the current setup could be improved, to give a >> better experience for users who might not be using maven for >> dependency management. It's easy for us to change now before >> graduation because once we graduate, people will need to update their >> dependencies anyway so there are no backward compatibility issues. >> >> The name of the single jar that has all of the openjpa stuff in it >> except for the documentation and examples is currently called >> openjpa- >> all. This name is confusing because unless they RTFM, people don't >> really know that it's not all the code you need, just all the jpa >> code. So I'd like to call this artifact openjpa. > > > +1 > > But we already have a project with that name, and that project builds >> the distributions. So I'd rename the current openjpa to openjpa-dist. >> Its ultimate destination in the Apache mirror structure is under >> www.apache.org/dist/openjpa once we graduate, so having dist in the >> project name helps understanding that this project builds the >> artifacts that go into dist. Separate from the artifacts that are >> published via maven. > > > +1 > > Finally, the openjpa-all jar includes its subcomponents as >> dependencies. I think this is wrong, since you end up with a class >> path with openjpa-all.jar as well as openjpa-kernel.jar and all the >> others. > > > I would like to change this too. I did a little experimenting and it > looks like the dependencies aren't needed in openjpa-all, but they are > needed for openjpa-project (to populate the lib directory). Moving the > dependencies into openjpa-project should be safe. > > We're also going to need to change the deploy logic to strip out the > -project suffix from the zip files. We've talked about it before when > I was releasing 0.9.7 (and before that when Marc was working on > 0.9.6), but I haven't had time to look into it. It should be fairly > easy to make the change. > > > Thoughts? >> >> Craig >> >> Craig Russell >> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/ >> jdo >> 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! >> >> >> > -Michael Dick
Re: [VOTE] Packaging with maven
On May 6, 2007, at 7:55 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote: On May 6, 2007, at 7:40 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote: +1 to the change. What do you think about changing dir names so that openjpa-all becomes openjpa-dist or something? Do you mean changing "openjpa-project" (which is the distribution) to "openjpa-dist"? We could, although it wouldn't impact the artifact names. I think the important thing is the artifact names. Once we agree on the artifact names, we can choose to rename the directories to suit. Craig -Patrick On 5/6/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Poking around the ActiveMQ pom.xml files, I notice that you can have a different artifactId than the module name (i.e., directory) you are in. I hadn't known you could do this. Currently, our artifacts name are: trunk/pom.xml: openjpa trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa-all trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: openjpa-project We could change these to: trunk/pom.xml: openjpa-parent trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: apache-openjpa I've tested this out, and it results in the openjpa aggregate jar being named "openjpa-VERSION.jar", the dependency being simply named "openjpa", and the assembly is named "apache-openjpa-VERSION.zip". None of the directories needed to be renamed. I've attached the patch that does this to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-194 Since this will mess up people who currently have maven dependencies on OpenJPA (i.e., people who depend on "openjpa-all" will now need to depend on "openjpa"), we should probably get this hammered out before leaving incubation. So I've gone ahead and turned the [DISCUSS] into a [VOTE] to see if we should go ahead and do this. A vote of +1 means we should do the renaming, -1 means we should not, and 0 means "don't care". The vote will remain open until Wednesday May 9th at 23:59 GMT. On May 4, 2007, at 6:55 AM, Michael Dick wrote: > Some comments below > > On 5/4/07, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I'd like reopen the discussion on how to package and name our >> artifacts. I think the current setup could be improved, to give a >> better experience for users who might not be using maven for >> dependency management. It's easy for us to change now before >> graduation because once we graduate, people will need to update their >> dependencies anyway so there are no backward compatibility issues. >> >> The name of the single jar that has all of the openjpa stuff in it >> except for the documentation and examples is currently called >> openjpa- >> all. This name is confusing because unless they RTFM, people don't >> really know that it's not all the code you need, just all the jpa >> code. So I'd like to call this artifact openjpa. > > > +1 > > But we already have a project with that name, and that project builds >> the distributions. So I'd rename the current openjpa to openjpa-dist. >> Its ultimate destination in the Apache mirror structure is under >> www.apache.org/dist/openjpa once we graduate, so having dist in the >> project name helps understanding that this project builds the >> artifacts that go into dist. Separate from the artifacts that are >> published via maven. > > > +1 > > Finally, the openjpa-all jar includes its subcomponents as >> dependencies. I think this is wrong, since you end up with a class >> path with openjpa-all.jar as well as openjpa-kernel.jar and all the >> others. > > > I would like to change this too. I did a little experimenting and > it looks > like the dependencies aren't needed in openjpa-all, but they are > needed for > openjpa-project (to populate the lib directory). Moving the > dependencies > into openjpa-project should be safe. > > We're also going to need to change the deploy logic to strip out the > -project suffix from the zip files. We've talked about it before > when I was > releasing 0.9.7 (and before that when Marc was working on 0.9.6), > but I > haven't had time to look into it. It should be fairly easy to make the > change. > > > Thoughts? >> >> Craig >> >> Craig Russell >> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/ products/ >> jdo >> 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! >> >> >> > -Michael Dick -- Patrick Linskey 202 669 5907 Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: [VOTE] Packaging with maven
On May 6, 2007, at 7:40 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote: +1 to the change. What do you think about changing dir names so that openjpa-all becomes openjpa-dist or something? Do you mean changing "openjpa-project" (which is the distribution) to "openjpa-dist"? We could, although it wouldn't impact the artifact names. -Patrick On 5/6/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Poking around the ActiveMQ pom.xml files, I notice that you can have a different artifactId than the module name (i.e., directory) you are in. I hadn't known you could do this. Currently, our artifacts name are: trunk/pom.xml: openjpa trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa-all trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: openjpa-project We could change these to: trunk/pom.xml: openjpa-parent trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: apache-openjpa I've tested this out, and it results in the openjpa aggregate jar being named "openjpa-VERSION.jar", the dependency being simply named "openjpa", and the assembly is named "apache-openjpa-VERSION.zip". None of the directories needed to be renamed. I've attached the patch that does this to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-194 Since this will mess up people who currently have maven dependencies on OpenJPA (i.e., people who depend on "openjpa-all" will now need to depend on "openjpa"), we should probably get this hammered out before leaving incubation. So I've gone ahead and turned the [DISCUSS] into a [VOTE] to see if we should go ahead and do this. A vote of +1 means we should do the renaming, -1 means we should not, and 0 means "don't care". The vote will remain open until Wednesday May 9th at 23:59 GMT. On May 4, 2007, at 6:55 AM, Michael Dick wrote: > Some comments below > > On 5/4/07, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I'd like reopen the discussion on how to package and name our >> artifacts. I think the current setup could be improved, to give a >> better experience for users who might not be using maven for >> dependency management. It's easy for us to change now before >> graduation because once we graduate, people will need to update their >> dependencies anyway so there are no backward compatibility issues. >> >> The name of the single jar that has all of the openjpa stuff in it >> except for the documentation and examples is currently called >> openjpa- >> all. This name is confusing because unless they RTFM, people don't >> really know that it's not all the code you need, just all the jpa >> code. So I'd like to call this artifact openjpa. > > > +1 > > But we already have a project with that name, and that project builds >> the distributions. So I'd rename the current openjpa to openjpa- dist. >> Its ultimate destination in the Apache mirror structure is under >> www.apache.org/dist/openjpa once we graduate, so having dist in the >> project name helps understanding that this project builds the >> artifacts that go into dist. Separate from the artifacts that are >> published via maven. > > > +1 > > Finally, the openjpa-all jar includes its subcomponents as >> dependencies. I think this is wrong, since you end up with a class >> path with openjpa-all.jar as well as openjpa-kernel.jar and all the >> others. > > > I would like to change this too. I did a little experimenting and > it looks > like the dependencies aren't needed in openjpa-all, but they are > needed for > openjpa-project (to populate the lib directory). Moving the > dependencies > into openjpa-project should be safe. > > We're also going to need to change the deploy logic to strip out the > -project suffix from the zip files. We've talked about it before > when I was > releasing 0.9.7 (and before that when Marc was working on 0.9.6), > but I > haven't had time to look into it. It should be fairly easy to make the > change. > > > Thoughts? >> >> Craig >> >> Craig Russell >> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/ products/ >> jdo >> 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! >> >> >> > -Michael Dick -- Patrick Linskey 202 669 5907
Re: [VOTE] Packaging with maven
+1 to the change. What do you think about changing dir names so that openjpa-all becomes openjpa-dist or something? -Patrick On 5/6/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Poking around the ActiveMQ pom.xml files, I notice that you can have a different artifactId than the module name (i.e., directory) you are in. I hadn't known you could do this. Currently, our artifacts name are: trunk/pom.xml: openjpa trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa-all trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: openjpa-project We could change these to: trunk/pom.xml: openjpa-parent trunk/openjpa-all/pom.xml: openjpa trunk/openjpa-project/pom.xml: apache-openjpa I've tested this out, and it results in the openjpa aggregate jar being named "openjpa-VERSION.jar", the dependency being simply named "openjpa", and the assembly is named "apache-openjpa-VERSION.zip". None of the directories needed to be renamed. I've attached the patch that does this to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-194 Since this will mess up people who currently have maven dependencies on OpenJPA (i.e., people who depend on "openjpa-all" will now need to depend on "openjpa"), we should probably get this hammered out before leaving incubation. So I've gone ahead and turned the [DISCUSS] into a [VOTE] to see if we should go ahead and do this. A vote of +1 means we should do the renaming, -1 means we should not, and 0 means "don't care". The vote will remain open until Wednesday May 9th at 23:59 GMT. On May 4, 2007, at 6:55 AM, Michael Dick wrote: > Some comments below > > On 5/4/07, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I'd like reopen the discussion on how to package and name our >> artifacts. I think the current setup could be improved, to give a >> better experience for users who might not be using maven for >> dependency management. It's easy for us to change now before >> graduation because once we graduate, people will need to update their >> dependencies anyway so there are no backward compatibility issues. >> >> The name of the single jar that has all of the openjpa stuff in it >> except for the documentation and examples is currently called >> openjpa- >> all. This name is confusing because unless they RTFM, people don't >> really know that it's not all the code you need, just all the jpa >> code. So I'd like to call this artifact openjpa. > > > +1 > > But we already have a project with that name, and that project builds >> the distributions. So I'd rename the current openjpa to openjpa-dist. >> Its ultimate destination in the Apache mirror structure is under >> www.apache.org/dist/openjpa once we graduate, so having dist in the >> project name helps understanding that this project builds the >> artifacts that go into dist. Separate from the artifacts that are >> published via maven. > > > +1 > > Finally, the openjpa-all jar includes its subcomponents as >> dependencies. I think this is wrong, since you end up with a class >> path with openjpa-all.jar as well as openjpa-kernel.jar and all the >> others. > > > I would like to change this too. I did a little experimenting and > it looks > like the dependencies aren't needed in openjpa-all, but they are > needed for > openjpa-project (to populate the lib directory). Moving the > dependencies > into openjpa-project should be safe. > > We're also going to need to change the deploy logic to strip out the > -project suffix from the zip files. We've talked about it before > when I was > releasing 0.9.7 (and before that when Marc was working on 0.9.6), > but I > haven't had time to look into it. It should be fairly easy to make the > change. > > > Thoughts? >> >> Craig >> >> Craig Russell >> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/ >> jdo >> 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! >> >> >> > -Michael Dick -- Patrick Linskey 202 669 5907
