[openejb-dev] Maven 2

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
13 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[openejb-dev] Maven 2

Alan Cabrera
I think that we should move to Maven 2 before all that lovely work
becomes out of sync with the HEAD.

Thoughts?


Regards,
Alan



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openejb-dev] Maven 2

dblevins
Administrator

On Oct 31, 2005, at 10:43 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:

> I think that we should move to Maven 2 before all that lovely work  
> becomes out of sync with the HEAD.
>
> Thoughts?

Posted this last week:

On Oct 25, 2005, at 11:15 PM, David Blevins wrote:

> Bringing this up again to make sure it doesn't go dead.
>
> I wonder if we couldn't move to the required maven2 build structure  
> and maintain a backwards compatible maven1 build?  There is no  
> assembly anymore, so this should be somewhat possible, no?



-David
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openejb-dev] Maven 2

Alan Cabrera
David Blevins wrote, On 10/31/2005 10:55 AM:

>
> On Oct 31, 2005, at 10:43 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
>> I think that we should move to Maven 2 before all that lovely work  
>> becomes out of sync with the HEAD.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
>
> Posted this last week:
>
> On Oct 25, 2005, at 11:15 PM, David Blevins wrote:
>
>> Bringing this up again to make sure it doesn't go dead.
>>
>> I wonder if we couldn't move to the required maven2 build structure  
>> and maintain a backwards compatible maven1 build?  There is no  
>> assembly anymore, so this should be somewhat possible, no?
>

/me removes the blevins mail filter...

I think that we should just support Maven 2.


Regards,
Alan



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openejb-dev] Maven 2

Dain Sundstrom
In reply to this post by dblevins
+1 to move permanently to m2, but it critical that the jars are  
published to both the m1 and m2 repos so Geronimo will continue to  
build.

-dain

On Oct 31, 2005, at 10:55 AM, David Blevins wrote:

>
> On Oct 31, 2005, at 10:43 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
>
>> I think that we should move to Maven 2 before all that lovely work  
>> becomes out of sync with the HEAD.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>
> Posted this last week:
>
> On Oct 25, 2005, at 11:15 PM, David Blevins wrote:
>
>
>> Bringing this up again to make sure it doesn't go dead.
>>
>> I wonder if we couldn't move to the required maven2 build  
>> structure and maintain a backwards compatible maven1 build?  There  
>> is no assembly anymore, so this should be somewhat possible, no?
>>
>
>
>
> -David
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openejb-dev] Maven 2

David Jencks
I want to move to m2 only, but I'd also like there to be a way to build
geronimo without running anything twice.  What do you propose?  What I
think is that we need to have several build stages, with the final one
building assembly.  This will be a lot easier when we are using the
packaging/assembly plugins.

thanks
david jencks

On Oct 31, 2005, at 11:11 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:

> +1 to move permanently to m2, but it critical that the jars are
> published to both the m1 and m2 repos so Geronimo will continue to
> build.
>
> -dain
>
> On Oct 31, 2005, at 10:55 AM, David Blevins wrote:
>
>>
>> On Oct 31, 2005, at 10:43 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I think that we should move to Maven 2 before all that lovely work
>>> becomes out of sync with the HEAD.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>
>> Posted this last week:
>>
>> On Oct 25, 2005, at 11:15 PM, David Blevins wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Bringing this up again to make sure it doesn't go dead.
>>>
>>> I wonder if we couldn't move to the required maven2 build structure
>>> and maintain a backwards compatible maven1 build?  There is no
>>> assembly anymore, so this should be somewhat possible, no?
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -David
>>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openejb-dev] Maven 2

Dain Sundstrom
On Oct 31, 2005, at 11:40 AM, David Jencks wrote:

> I want to move to m2 only, but I'd also like there to be a way to  
> build geronimo without running anything twice.  What do you  
> propose?  What I think is that we need to have several build  
> stages, with the final one building assembly.  This will be a lot  
> easier when we are using the packaging/assembly plugins.

I think the Geronimo part is really a discussion for the Geronimo  
mailing list....

What do you specifically mean by "running anything twice"?  Would it  
be ok to have a build like this?

$ cd ~/work/geronimo
$ maven modules:install
....
$ cd ~/work/openejb
$ m2 install
...
$ cd ~/work/geronimo
$ maven assembly:install

In your work dir you could just have a script that executes those  
commands.

BTW the example above assumes that "maven assembly:install" uses  
either the current stuff or the packaging/assembly plugins.

-dain
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openejb-dev] Maven 2

David Jencks

On Oct 31, 2005, at 12:15 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:

> On Oct 31, 2005, at 11:40 AM, David Jencks wrote:
>
>> I want to move to m2 only, but I'd also like there to be a way to
>> build geronimo without running anything twice.  What do you propose?  
>> What I think is that we need to have several build stages, with the
>> final one building assembly.  This will be a lot easier when we are
>> using the packaging/assembly plugins.
>
> I think the Geronimo part is really a discussion for the Geronimo
> mailing list....
>
> What do you specifically mean by "running anything twice"?  Would it
> be ok to have a build like this?
>
> $ cd ~/work/geronimo
> $ maven modules:install
> ....
> $ cd ~/work/openejb
> $ m2 install
> ...
> $ cd ~/work/geronimo
> $ maven assembly:install
>
> In your work dir you could just have a script that executes those
> commands.
>
> BTW the example above assumes that "maven assembly:install" uses
> either the current stuff or the packaging/assembly plugins.

That is exactly what I was thinking of.  That would be completely fine
by me.

david jencks

>
> -dain
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openejb-dev] Maven 2

Brett Porter-3

> That is exactly what I was thinking of.  That would be completely fine
> by me.
>
> david jencks
>

Let us know if there is anything we can do to help.

As for packaging/assembly on Geronimo - have you looked at how the m2
assembly plugin works? I wonder if there isn't some overlap that we can
make them the same thing to make a later move to m2 easier. I'm happy to
discuss that on the Geronimo dev list.

- Brett
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openejb-dev] Maven 2

David Jencks

On Oct 31, 2005, at 3:47 PM, Brett Porter wrote:

>
>> That is exactly what I was thinking of.  That would be completely
>> fine by me.
>> david jencks
>
> Let us know if there is anything we can do to help.

Well, I would really like one thing I can run to build geronimo +
openejb.  If there is some way to call an m1 project from m2, I would
think we could get everything except the assembly module converted now
to m2.

>
> As for packaging/assembly on Geronimo - have you looked at how the m2
> assembly plugin works? I wonder if there isn't some overlap that we
> can make them the same thing to make a later move to m2 easier. I'm
> happy to discuss that on the Geronimo dev list.

Whether or not there is much overlap between the assembly plugins, the
hard part is going to be plan/configuration maintenance, not writing
the m2 versions of the packaging and assembly plugins.  I'm hoping I
can get back to that this week.

thanks
david jencks

>
> - Brett
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openejb-dev] Maven 2

dblevins
Administrator

On Oct 31, 2005, at 6:17 PM, David Jencks wrote:

>
> On Oct 31, 2005, at 3:47 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>>> That is exactly what I was thinking of.  That would be completely  
>>> fine by me.
>>> david jencks
>>>
>>
>> Let us know if there is anything we can do to help.
>>
>
> Well, I would really like one thing I can run to build geronimo +  
> openejb.  If there is some way to call an m1 project from m2, I  
> would think we could get everything except the assembly module  
> converted now to m2.
>

Brett had a couple ideas along that line.  I'll put them in a thread  
on the Geronimo list as it seems like the best place to settle that  
part.

So, is it safe to assume we are at the point where everyone is  
onboard to switch on the OpenEJB side provided we can figure  
something out on the Geronimo side to still build OpenEJB when  
Geronimo builds?

-David




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openejb-dev] Maven 2

Alan Cabrera
David Blevins wrote, On 10/31/2005 6:47 PM:

>
> On Oct 31, 2005, at 6:17 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>
>>
>> On Oct 31, 2005, at 3:47 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> That is exactly what I was thinking of.  That would be completely  
>>>> fine by me.
>>>> david jencks
>>>>
>>>
>>> Let us know if there is anything we can do to help.
>>>
>>
>> Well, I would really like one thing I can run to build geronimo +  
>> openejb.  If there is some way to call an m1 project from m2, I  
>> would think we could get everything except the assembly module  
>> converted now to m2.
>>
>
> Brett had a couple ideas along that line.  I'll put them in a thread  
> on the Geronimo list as it seems like the best place to settle that  
> part.
>
> So, is it safe to assume we are at the point where everyone is  
> onboard to switch on the OpenEJB side provided we can figure  
> something out on the Geronimo side to still build OpenEJB when  
> Geronimo builds?
>

Let's do it.  :)


Regards,
Alan




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openejb-dev] Maven 2

David Jencks

On Nov 8, 2005, at 2:14 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:

> David Blevins wrote, On 10/31/2005 6:47 PM:
>
>>
>> On Oct 31, 2005, at 6:17 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 31, 2005, at 3:47 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> That is exactly what I was thinking of.  That would be completely  
>>>>> fine by me.
>>>>> david jencks
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Let us know if there is anything we can do to help.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, I would really like one thing I can run to build geronimo +  
>>> openejb.  If there is some way to call an m1 project from m2, I  
>>> would think we could get everything except the assembly module  
>>> converted now to m2.
>>>
>>
>> Brett had a couple ideas along that line.  I'll put them in a thread  
>> on the Geronimo list as it seems like the best place to settle that  
>> part.
>>
>> So, is it safe to assume we are at the point where everyone is  
>> onboard to switch on the OpenEJB side provided we can figure  
>> something out on the Geronimo side to still build OpenEJB when  
>> Geronimo builds?
>>
>
> Let's do it.  :)

Fine with me but...

I recently added a geronimo plugin to construct geronimo-service.xml
dependency files from the maven dependencies.  This is so far just a
maven 1 plugin.  It requires at least one geronimo module
(service-builder) for xmlbeans classes.  I'd suggest resurrecting the
hand-written geronimo-service.xml file for core until we can get this
plugin migrated to m2

thanks
david jencks

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openejb-dev] Maven 2

Dain Sundstrom
In reply to this post by Alan Cabrera
On Nov 8, 2005, at 2:14 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:

> David Blevins wrote, On 10/31/2005 6:47 PM:
>>
>> Brett had a couple ideas along that line.  I'll put them in a  
>> thread  on the Geronimo list as it seems like the best place to  
>> settle that  part.
>>
>> So, is it safe to assume we are at the point where everyone is  
>> onboard to switch on the OpenEJB side provided we can figure  
>> something out on the Geronimo side to still build OpenEJB when  
>> Geronimo builds?
>>
>
> Let's do it.  :)

The big remaining issue is how we run the itests.  I was looking at  
this, but have too much on my plate right now.  Here is what I was  
thinking:

Split the itests into two modules:

itests-ejb which contains only the server side ejbs
itests-tests which only contains the client side tests

Then we move the actual running of the tests into Geronimo.  I was  
thinking we stick it into the Geronimo assembly module.

Unfortunately, this is a lot of work, and I don't know how to handle  
the security tests.

-dain