Re: m2 builds (was: Where can I get a recent nightly build?)

On 1/9/08, Henri Yandell <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jan 9, 2008 9:01 AM, Rahul Akolkar <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 1/9/08, Henri Yandell <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > My fault on the dupe - I've been shoving user and dev into the same
> > > folder for years, so tend not to notice which list I'm on.
> > >
> > > I've started with String taglib - best to scratch the itch you have
> > > etc. First easy steps are done, next steps are the taglibs specific
> > > bits.
> > >
> > > Namely:
> > >
> > > * Generating the TLD (and putting in the jar as taglib.tld).
> > > * Building an example war.
> > > * Building a doc war.
> > >
> > <snip/>
> >
> > My initial impression at recreating the current release artifacts
> > using m2 (whether we should stick to the current style of release
> > artifacts TBD, but current packaging has worked for us so far) has
> > been that each taglib will have a multi-module build, one that has a
> > jar packaging (for taglibs-foo.jar) and two that will have war
> > packaging (foo-examples.war and foo-doc.war). Probably need some
> > antrun execution for the TLDs, possibly for parts of the doc jar
> > (especially for RDC, which uses tag files and custom stylesheets to
> > generate TLD reference docs).
> >
> > The above plan will require quite a reshuffle in the svn layout (hence
> > I opted for a branch).
>
> Yeah - I really hate having to have multiple projects. The example and
> doc war are not projects, they are part of the website in Maven terms
> - we just don't want to do things in xdoc or apt. Feels that it should
> still be entirely doable as a single project.
>
<snip/>

 * Per m2 terminology: s/project/module/
 * Agreed doc war is mvn site-like, though examples war is not
 * apt I can understand, but I like xdoc, docbook etc. ;-)


> I think we should try for an atomic project; see if that works. Only
> if we can't make that fit should we go the triple project route.
>
<snap/>

Sure, I think I will try a multi-module build for RDC (I suspect that
suits the m2 modules and packaging design), but I am absolutely in
favor of trying other styles (if that needs any saying :-).


> > > The Ant system has the ability to output different versions of the
> > > specification - I think we'll probably be losing that given that we
> > > have to specify which servlet jar we're using. So I'm not sure if
> > > 'Generating the TLD' is worthwhile, or if we should just change the
> > > xml file into an actual tld file. I guess it depends if we lose any
> > > data.
> > >
> > <snap/>
> >
> > Yup, see antrun bit above. About different specifications, it may be
> > possible to do that using m2 profiles.
>
> I think this is the first decision - is there any value in keeping the
> tld generation. It's not as if we've been building and distributing
> taglibs for different spec versions; the RM has always chosen one.
>
> The simpler we keep the build, the more we can maintain with less
> effort. While powerful, I think the build system's complexity has been
> one factor in lack of energy to do anything.
>
<snip/>

I say feel free to simplify.

-Rahul