On 7/23/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Any more inputs here ? Maybe we could stage this in two phases, for now just make all project consistent and pointing to <version>2-incubating</version> as suggested on this thread. And then continue discussions on pros/cons of having multiple poms, one for each sub-project. Thoughts ? On 7/17/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My main reason for asking the question around version, is that we have > learned from past experiences that maven does NOT work OK when you > have projects with different versions on the reactor. Today, if you > have a clean repo, and try to build from java, build is failing trying > to download some artifacts that are indeed in the reactor to be built, > and I suspect that the issue is due to different versions on the > reactor. > > I just wanted to be consistent to avoid strange errors, but now that > the discussion jumped to a different direction, I have couple > questions : > > What's the user experience with each project having it's own parent > pom ? Are we going to still have a top-down build (e.g from java) ? or > builds are going to be top down based on sub-projects (e.g from > java/sca) ? > > Currently, the parent pom stores general standard > information/configuration for all sub-projects. If we move away from > this, and each sub-project have it's own parent, aren't we going to be > more susceptible to have unsynchronized common information, as people > will likely update a specific info/config in one of the sub-project > parent pom, and forget the others ? Maybe I'm interested to learn more > about thoughts on what are the advantages of having multiple poms ? > > > On 7/17/07, Venkata Krishnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > +1 for each subproject to have its own.. unless we want to consciously > > tie in some commonality through this between the subprojects. > > > > - Venkat > > > > On 7/17/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 7/17/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 7/17/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Doing a quick search on the code, looks like we have a combination of > > > > > parent pom references in our current trunk code. > > > > > > > > > > Searching for: <version>2-incubating</version> > > > > > cts\pom.xml(24): <version>2-incubating</version> > > > > > sca\pom.xml(25): <version>2-incubating</version> > > > > > sca\pom.xml(160): <version>2-incubating</version> > > > > > Found 3 occurrence(s) in 2 file(s) > > > > > > > > > > Searching for: <version>2-incubating-SNAPSHOT</version> > > > > > buildtools\pom.xml(25): <version>2-incubating-SNAPSHOT</version> > > > > > buildtools\pom.xml(30): <version>2-incubating-SNAPSHOT</version> > > > > > das\pom.xml(25): <version>2-incubating-SNAPSHOT</version> > > > > > pom\parent\pom.xml(32): <version>2-incubating-SNAPSHOT</version> > > > > > sdo\pom.xml(25): <version>2-incubating-SNAPSHOT</version> > > > > > sdo\sdo-api\pom.xml(25): <version>2-incubating-SNAPSHOT</version> > > > > > spec\sdo-api\pom.xml(25): <version>2-incubating-SNAPSHOT</version> > > > > > Found 7 occurrence(s) in 6 file(s) > > > > > > > > > > I guess, we should be using the SNAPSHOT version in trunk, but I want > > > > > to ask before I make these changes. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Luciano Resende > > > > > Apache Tuscany Committer > > > > > http://people.apache.org/~lresende > > > > > http://lresende.blogspot.com/ > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > Hi Luciano > > > > > > > > Shouldn't we be developing against a released/stable version of the parent > > > > pom unless there are changes that are required? I.e if we develop against > > > > a > > > > snapshot , and rely on its features, then we should release the snapshot > > > > parent pom before we release packages that depend on it. > > > > > > > > Simon > > > > > > > > > > From past discussion thats been the intention i think - that we'd use the > > > released non-SNAPSHOT version, but thats going back to the days when there > > > was separate releases of all the different modules. Probably a bit late for > > > this now - but do we really even want/need this parent pom? It seems simpler > > > and more flexible to me if each sub project just has its own. > > > > > > ...ant > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > -- > Luciano Resende > Apache Tuscany Committer > http://people.apache.org/~lresende > http://lresende.blogspot.com/ > -- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany Committer http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Luciano
Sounds sensible to me. As we have a released artifact that meets our needs being consistent around this is good. At least then, assuming we move to separate parent poms, we are moving from one consistent state to another. Simon
