Hi Thomas, tried it now documentation works and looks really neat :)
However, I get an java.lang.OutOfMemoryError when calling just maven and a lot of errors for java:compile for WebdavServlet. Does it work for you? What might be my problem? Having the jars in http://www.codeva.net/maven looks fine, but is there any standard repository we could put the jars to? Oliver On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 12:18:10 +0100, Thomas Draier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hi all, > has anybody found some time to test the maven distribution i put on > http://www.codeva.net/jahia/webdav/users/root/public/maven.tgz ? i just > set up a maven repository with all necessary libraries, so you should > have no problems for compiling now - just add the line > maven.repo.remote=http://www.codeva.net/maven in the root > project.properties file, and all libs will be downloaded when starting > the compilation. > thomas > > Le 24 oct. 04, � 21:41, Thomas Draier a �crit : > > > > > hi, > > i finally got something working - it is not yet as complete as the > > current build system, but main targets are working, like generating > > jars, distributions, documentation, .. i've got 2 main projects, > > server and clients, each of one separated in multiple small > > subprojects. i did not include yet projector, wck, and the testsuite > > module. the jars are not included within the projects, as they should > > be on a separate repository. most of them are available on the > > standard maven repository and will be downloaded automatically, but > > some are not available for release or licensing issue, so you'll need > > to install all those jars manually. i may also be able to give you > > access to my maven repository, so that downloads will be managed by > > maven. i'll check if it's possible, that will be much easier as you > > will just need to type a single command to download everything and > > make the distrib. anyway, if you want to a have a first look at the > > whole thing, i've bundled all the project in a tgz file available at > > http://www.codeva.net/jahia/webdav/users/root/public/maven.tgz (on a > > slide repository, of course ;-) > > thomas > > > > Le 19 oct. 04, � 17:27, James Mason a �crit : > > > >> Well, it can't hurt to look, and if you're offering to do the work ;). > >> Once you have something done we can all evaluate it and then put it > >> to a > >> vote. > >> > >> -James > >> > >> On Tue, 2004-10-19 at 03:53, Thomas Draier wrote: > >>> hi james, > >>> if you're interested i would be happy to try to make the base > >>> structure > >>> and project files for the different slide subprojects - i agree that > >>> all developers still have to download and install maven, and that > >>> it's > >>> real turn off, but it is more or less as simple as ant to install and > >>> imho the benefits are so huge you quickly become addict :-) > >>> thomas > >>> > >>> Le 18 oct. 04, � 18:03, James Mason a �crit : > >>> > >>>> Thomas, > >>>> > >>>> I need to spend some time playing with maven before I could support > >>>> moving to it. I really like ant, so if maven enhances what ant > >>>> brings > >>>> I'm all for that. However, as a developer who's never had maven > >>>> installed it's been a real turn-off for me to come across a project > >>>> that > >>>> requires me to download and setup a whole new environment just to > >>>> build > >>>> their code. > >>>> > >>>> If maven is simple enough to setup and integrates well enough with > >>>> the > >>>> existing development environments of the committers/contributors to > >>>> Slide, then changing build systems is a possibility. > >>>> > >>>> -James > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, 2004-10-18 at 03:47, Thomas Draier wrote: > >>>>> hi, > >>>>> i still have 2 patches waiting in the bugzilla , 31196 & 31265 , > >>>>> can > >>>>> anybody have a look at it before changing the structure ? > >>>>> restructuration of the cvs would be great - and that also would be > >>>>> very > >>>>> nice to use maven to make the builds, as it completely clarifies > >>>>> dependencies with other modules, that is very helpful when > >>>>> integrating > >>>>> in other projects, and it gives a "standard" file organization for > >>>>> all > >>>>> the project files. maven is replacing ant in more and more projects > >>>>> and > >>>>> i believe that would be the good time to integrate it into slide, > >>>>> what > >>>>> do you think ? > >>>>> thomas > >>>>> > >>>>> Le 18 oct. 04, � 09:24, Oliver Zeigermann a �crit : > >>>>> > >>>>>> +1 to all this. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I think we could begin restructuring the CVS HEAD soon - just make > >>>>>> sure everyone committed their patches before - and have it > >>>>>> avaiable > >>>>>> for general release in 2.2 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Oliver > >>>>>> > >>>>>> James Mason schrieb: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Big +1 from me. Your thread in the PMC actually got me thinking > >>>>>>> along > >>>>>>> similar lines. I'd like to take it a little further than just > >>>>>>> separate > >>>>>>> release cycles, though. > >>>>>>> Currently the Slide project is structured something like: > >>>>>>> +- Slide Server > >>>>>>> \ > >>>>>>> +- Slide Client > >>>>>>> +- Proposals > >>>>>>> +- Everything else (etc) > >>>>>>> which means everything is effectively a child of the server. I'd > >>>>>>> like > >>>>>>> to > >>>>>>> make the Server a sibling of everything else rather than being > >>>>>>> the > >>>>>>> parent. I think this better reflects the current state of the > >>>>>>> project, > >>>>>>> gives more prominence to the other components, and will make > >>>>>>> builds > >>>>>>> easier to manage. > >>>>>>> I'd like to see this structure reflected in both cvs and the > >>>>>>> documentation/website. I think the former will make > >>>>>>> builds/release > >>>>>>> easier and the latter will make it easier for people to find what > >>>>>>> they're looking for (as well as giving more prominence to the > >>>>>>> other > >>>>>>> components). > >>>>>>> I think this kind of separation would also provide a good gauge > >>>>>>> of > >>>>>>> whether Slide could stand on its own as a TLP. At this point I > >>>>>>> don't > >>>>>>> think we could (nor do we need to), but if we can organize the > >>>>>>> complexity we currently have and make it clear how current and > >>>>>>> future > >>>>>>> components fit under the Slide umbrella I think we'll be mostly > >>>>>>> ready > >>>>>>> if/when there is enough external interest in Slide to warrant a > >>>>>>> TLP. > >>>>>>> -James > >>>>>>> On Sun, 2004-10-17 at 22:35, Oliver Zeigermann wrote: > >>>>>>>> Folks, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Slide has become a large project with lots of components. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> After some experience with the testsuite which until 2.1b2 has > >>>>>>>> not > >>>>>>>> been released at all and the projector which did not make it > >>>>>>>> into > >>>>>>>> the 2.1b2, but seems to be almost ready for prime time, it > >>>>>>>> might be > >>>>>>>> a good idea to release at least these components in a decoupled > >>>>>>>> release process: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> - projector: WebDAV workflow and rendering > >>>>>>>> - testsuite: most complete WebDAV testsuite > >>>>>>>> - wck: simple WebDAV enabling kit for enterprise / business > >>>>>>>> systems > >>>>>>>> of all kinds > >>>>>>>> - WebDAV client library (maybe along with ant tasks and > >>>>>>>> connector) > >>>>>>>> - WebDAV command line cient > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I only recently understood this is possible without any problem > >>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>> would make the release cycle - which is HUGE for Slide because > >>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>> its complexity - much shorter. We still could have a general > >>>>>>>> and a > >>>>>>>> bundled release once in a while. But projector could release > >>>>>>>> earlier > >>>>>>>> than the general Slide 2.2 which can not be expected before > >>>>>>>> 2005. > >>>>>>>> Same thing with WCK, it is at least ready for a beta, but of > >>>>>>>> course > >>>>>>>> can not be part of the 2.1 release, so it would have to wait > >>>>>>>> until > >>>>>>>> 2005 as well. I have big expectations in WCK concerning a > >>>>>>>> boost in > >>>>>>>> publicity for Slide... > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Additionally, the server and client parts may have different > >>>>>>>> development speeds, and might be release asynchronously, which > >>>>>>>> is > >>>>>>>> fine as they communicate over WebDAV (2.1 has been an exception > >>>>>>>> as > >>>>>>>> new methods have been added). > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We would need additional release managers for each component > >>>>>>>> then. > >>>>>>>> This could all be James, but that would be unfair I guess. So, I > >>>>>>>> would propose Daniel for the projector, Stefan for the > >>>>>>>> testsuite, > >>>>>>>> myself for wck, and Ingo for the client parts. James would > >>>>>>>> remain > >>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>> be the general release manager. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Of course all this would be on a volunteer base and if there is > >>>>>>>> no > >>>>>>>> release manager for each sub component obviously there is no > >>>>>>>> interest for a dedicated release. For now I can only signal my > >>>>>>>> willingness to do this for WCK. I am pretty sure Daniel would > >>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>> projector. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Comments? Does this make sense? Do you people want this as well? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Oliver > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>>>>> --- > >>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: > >>>>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>>>> --- > >>>>>>> - > >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: > >>>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>>>> --- > >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>> -- > >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> - > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> > >>> > >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
