Re: jdom 2.0 with generics

I've been switching over to maven for my cross-IDE projects recently, and in
fact was just converting some of mine from native NetBeans projects to Maven
projects -- which is the only cross-IDE project representation that I'm
aware of.  (Maven projects are the easiest for everyone to consume, assuming
that everyone is using different IDEs or the command line.)

That said, I build jdom extremely rarely, so I have no case of my own.

On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Rolf wrote:

>
> Hi Paul.
>
> Couple of things.... I've found that git's 'mv' tracking is somewhat
> problematic, it's not as easy to track an item's history than before the
> move.... you have to specify --follow for the 'git log' request.
>
> Neither eclipse nor github appear to apply the --follow logic to the moved
> files' history... It would be nicer if they did, since all the classes have
> moved once already (jdom -> jdom2).
>
> I acknowledge that the current system of dumping the supporting jars in
> the repo is 'crude', but, it has some other advantages. Having everyone
> using the same jar versions for the JDOM2 development would reduce the
> number of 'head-scratching' problems. This is up for discussion, but it
> seems that eliminating inconsistencies at this point in the development
> would be useful.
>
> Finally, I am in the habit of using ant and eclipse (call me 'old
> fashioned'), and I have the habit of throwing in an 'eclipse' target for
> ant build.xml files. I have added this target to the jdom build file.
>
> Running 'ant eclipse' and refreshing your eclipse project (f5) will set
> up/update your eclipse source folders, and library dependencies in a way
> that makes it all 'just work'.
>
> I normally have a 'smarter' eclipse target that uses the ant classpath to
> set up eclipse, but, in this case, I have it hard-coded at the moment. I
> see that it's missing the xml-apis.jar file, so it needs an update anyway.
> I'll make it dynamic based on the ant compile classpath instead.
>
> Obviously the demand for 'Mavenization' is growing... perhaps the most
> important question is 'how important' is it? I have always worked in an
> environment where build dependencies are more tightly controlled than what
> maven would allow, and the dependency-loading nature of maven would be
> 'wrong'.
>
> If you can make a convincing argument to 'Mavenize' then the actual commit
> process would have to be very tightly coordinated, and it would interrupt
> the actual JDOM2 coding as things stabilize. Further, it would also benefit
> from having the comprehensive unit testing in order to confirm that nothing
> has broken in 'the wash'.
>
> As for a full Maven re-structure, I am hesitant... and I think Jason will
> have to weigh in with the final word on that. It's more far-reaching than
> just JDOM2...
>
> Rolf
>
> On Mon, 8 Aug 2011 15:25:31 +0200, Paul Libbrecht <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > I think Brad's offer was to do it.
> > It does involve an amount of move around but it brings a few advantages
> > for people to take things up.
> >
> > Except for being able to transparently depend on jdom if it makes its
> way
> > into the maven repo (that's somewhat further), it allows to open in
> Eclipse
> > and IntelliJ IDEA directly, classpath and sourcepath all set.
> >
> > Brad, have you tried using the IntelliJ IDEA or Eclipse git checkout
> > methods (IntelliJ had me locate a Git executable which I had to
> download,
> > about 3 minutes)? If using this rearranging there will then nicely keep
> > history the same way an svn mv would do.
> >
> > paul
> >
> > Le 8 août 2011 à 14:52, jdom a écrit :
> >
> >>
> >> Hi Brad
> >>
> >> In the short term it is unlikely that the JDOM repo will be converted
> to
> >> a
> >> maven-style build. I simply do not use maven at all, and I do not know
> >> the
> >> maven 'paradigm'.
> >>
> >> I know that the possibility is there to produe the maven co-ordinates
> for
> >> the JDOM releases, but it woul dmake sense to first get something
> usable
> >> out of JDOM2 before we go publishing it as a maven resource.
> >>
> >> Bottom line is that, if it happens, it will be one of the last things
> to
> >> go through. Probably only after the alpha/beta/final stages of JDOM2
> are
> >> settled.
> >>
> >> Still, JDOM is all about 'Java manipulation of XML made easy', so, it
> >> should be considered, and I've updated the wiki page
> >> https://github.com/hunterhacker/jdom/wiki/JDOM-2.0 to reflect that
> Maven
> >> artifacts should be a possible goal of JDOM2.
> >>
> >> Pleased to see the mounting excitement for JDOM2.
> >>
> >> Rolf
> >>
>
>

_______________________________________________
To control your jdom-interest membership:
http://www.jdom.org/mailman/options/jdom-interest/[email protected]