Noel J. Bergman ha scritto:
As noted in a reply to the commit that broke the build:
Added maven2 poms for every module and updated the phoenix-deployment
module to work in multimodule project
This means two build systems to maintain. Because of this, Stefano didn't
notice over a span of a couple of days that he had broken the server build.
I am giving serious consideration to voting against this change, and feel
that we should make the effort to purge all mavenization from JAMES as soon
as possible, and take advantage of the improvements in Ant, as Robert is
already doing.
--- Noel
I didn't recognize I broke the build simply because in svn you really
delete the folder only when you commit. Before I marked the folder as
moved but it was on my filesystem (because of how svn works) and I
didn't notice this: I wouldn't have noticed this even without m2,
unfortunately (should we remove subversion too? ;-) ). I'M SORRY anyway:
normal people can do mistakes (I'm not God).
As you noticed I think there was one line in build.xml to be removed and
everything worked again (the line was in the error thrown by ant, so it
has been pretty easy): I would expect more collaboration and less
complaints by a respected ASF member and so experienced committer like
you, the next time ;-)
If someone take the time to create out website with ant I have no
problem in using ant: I did the maven2 based website many months ago
(not yesterday, but on may 2006, r424391), so it is weird to see you
wanting to veto changes today. I know both maven2 and ant, both have
their merits.
If you want to remove the pom stuff, just do it: you will not receive
vetoes by me (just remember that we have poms in all of james products,
one of them being m2-only now and this is how our website has been built
in the last year). I'm happy anyway I spent the time to make the
multimodule build to work and create the website (including the
aggregated javadocs/jxr). This helped me comparing what is needed to do
something similar with ant and with maven2. I admit I expected some more
thank you and some less complaints, but at least I'm happy with what I
learned, so, no problem.
If you are interested in this (and I bet you are not, because you seems
to be so "biased" on this topic), after this comparison I still think
that maven2 is the way to go, even if it is not without problems: 1/3rd
of the xml needed by the m2 resources and it also build the websites
with a lot of reports, and it could also easily be configured to
automatically release and sign our deployments (if it was our main build
system).
If I had to vote about using a single build system for james server and
if +1 means I have to contribute to make it happen, I would vote +1 for
maven2 only build, +0 for ant simply because I'm not interested in
learning more of an "old generation" (IMHO, of course) build system.
Stefano
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
