I agree with what Bert are Luciano are saying and I'm having the same
problems while trying to get the Axis2 binding going again in trunk. Many
people have been having trouble with this for months now and have been
coming up with their own pom.xml files or bat scripts or whatever to work
around these problems ( or creating their own branch or just giving up and
going away). I think its time we reviewed this modularity strategy and try
to find something that more people are happy with.

Isn't the only real problem with having a top level pom.xml to enable a full
build is that mixing different version levels in a single reactor build
confuses maven. To fix this lets just go back to having a single version
used by all the modules in trunk. If people don't want to to a full build
from the top they can ignore the top-level pom.xml. Modules can still be
released individually or in smaller groups with any specific version name as
desired, but build the trunk from the top gets all the modules built with
the latest code all using the latest SNAPSHOT version name as this is what
people want and expect.

  ...ant

On 3/12/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Jim said:
>The trunk has been quite stable for some time.

What's your scope of trunk ?  Following the instructions in
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/BUILDING.txt
nothing
get's built. Trying to build the sca profile or going directly to java/sca
give me an error, as there is no pom.xml available after Jeremy changed
the
sca pom.xml to pom/sca. Also, couple modules does not built as of today,
due
to changes in kernel, and there is no documentation of what's working or
not. And if you have to try to figure this out, you have to try each
module/project inside sca and try to figure out what's failing and what's
not.  Is this considered stable ?


Based on some e-mails I've read on this list, looks like if we really want
to expand out Tuscany SCA community, we really need some improvement over
what we have today around build and probably other areas as well. Also,
being able to build multiple modules at once, should not break the
modularity policy. Or maybe I'm really missing something, and maybe
someone
could share with me an easy way to verify and build multiple modules for
the
SCA project in trunk as currently I'm using a pretty old technique, a
build.bat that builds the modules i know are working.

--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende <http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende>

On 3/12/07, Jim Marino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 12, 2007, at 12:57 PM, Bert Lamb wrote:
>
> > On 3/10/07, ant elder < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I think we really have to do something as its way to hard to get
> >> things
> >> built right now and I'm positive this is putting people off.
> >
> > It is actively putting me off right now.  The build problems with
> > Tuscany are quite off putting.  Anything that can be done to rectify
> > this and document the correct way to build, and to ensure that those
> > instructions continue to work would be greatly appreciated.
> The trunk has been quite stable for some time. What problems are you
> having when building? Have you tried the 2.0 alpha as you can avoid
> having to build source altogether?
>
> FYI there is documentation on building Java SCA at:
>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/TUSCANY/sca-java-development.html
>
> If something is unclear, let me know and I will try my best to answer
> questions.
>
> Jim
>
> >
> > -Bert
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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]
>
>

Reply via email to