Raymond, I think in this specific scenario, we were trying to build an assembly from different components. This included the kernel, standalone server, a discovery implementation, amanagement implementation, one of the sample applications etc. I don't think having a single maven POM that included all the modules for all the artifacts being assembled would have been practically feasible. In such scenarios, IMO, an assembly is exactly what we need. It is assembling a distribution from a set of components that have already been built. We can't expect the assembly to build all the components it assembles. Howabout, the transitive dependencies for those components? Would we get the assembly build to build them as well?
From, my experience in the last two months, I haven't found the lack of a pom that included all the modules to be built, an inhibiting factor. Rather, I had a clear picture of what artifacts I wanted for the task I was doing and built them individually or depended on published snapshots. As the system grows in complexity it is difficult to have everything built in one go. That would be introducing unnecessary coupling. My personal view would be to build related components together, like the kernel pom including SPI, core, host-api etc and runtime building standalone, runtime services etc. Thanks Meeraj -----Original Message----- From: Raymond Feng [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 3:50 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Compilation status Hi, I hate to bring up this issue again, but I really share the pain that Mario just went through. Don't we think we have room for improvements to build the stuff in a much simpler fashion? To me, to have a build for a bundle which consists of a set of the modules working together at the same level would be really helpful for the poor guys. It's very difficult to manually coordinate the build across modules even with published SNAPSHOTs (which I don't see it happens frequently and it's also very hard because a collection of SNAPSHOTs don't really establish a baseline for those who want to try the latest code). I (assume that I) understand all the rationales and pricinples for modulization. But I'm really scared by the user experiences. Where is the reasonable middle ground? Thanks, Raymond ----- Original Message ----- From: "Antollini, Mario" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 6:57 AM Subject: RE: Compilation status Meeraj, Finally, I was able to generate the server.star.jar file. This is compilation order that worked for me: java/spec/commonj/ java/spec/sca-api-r1.0/ java/sca/kernel/ java/sca/runtime/ java/sca/services/ java/sca/contrib/discovery/ java/sca/contrib/discovery/jms java/sca/console/ java/sca/core-samples/ java/distribution/sca/demo.app java/distribution/sca/demo/ Disclaimer: I have been struggling with the compilation for two days, I cannot fully assure that the order of the above list is the actual order. If anyone is able to compile this exact way, please let us know. BTW, java/sca/extensions/ cannot be compiled for now. Besides the good news, I was not able to start the servers (take a look at the attachment to see the errors) Do you have any idea what could be happening? Thanks and regards, Mario -----Original Message----- From: Meeraj Kunnumpurath [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 10:13 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Compilation status Mario, AFAIK extensions in trunk is still in a bit of a flux. If you want to run the demo, you don't need to run the extensions (the demo uses Java container with local bindings), I will try to post a dfeinitive list of tasks to build and run the demo later in the day, which will be useful to Simon as well. Ta Meeraj -----Original Message----- From: Antollini, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 12:29 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Compilation status Meeraj, I just wanted you to know that I am still not able to compile the code I checked out from SVN. The main problem is located in the *extensions* project. I have been modifying the pom files within this project but I did not manage to get it compiled yet. Basically, the main problems are related to inconsistencies between parent references (e.g.; axis2's root project is using groupId *org.apache.tuscany.sca.axis2* while the plugin subproject states that its parent is *org.apache.tuscany.sca.extensions.axis2*). Any tips about this? Thanks, Mario This message has been checked for all email viruses by MessageLabs. ***************************************************** You can find us at www.voca.com ***************************************************** This communication is confidential and intended for the exclusive use of the addressee only. You should not disclose its contents to any other person. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender named above immediately. Registered in England, No 1023742, Registered Office: Voca Limited Drake House, Three Rivers Court, Homestead Road, Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire, WD3 1FX. United Kingdom VAT No. 226 6112 87 This message has been checked for all email viruses by MessageLabs. --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] This message has been checked for all email viruses by MessageLabs. This message has been checked for all email viruses by MessageLabs. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
