Hubert Iwaniuk wrote:
> Thanks for input.
>
> They do now (correct me if I'm wrong), so it could be improved.
Which one? I don't think they are going there IMO.
>
> H.
>
> On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 9:19 PM, Justin Lee <Justin.Lee_at_sun.com
> <mailto:Justin.Lee_at_sun.com>> wrote:
>
> Generated artifacts should never go under VCS control. They can be
> generated easily enough at build time.
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to review our build configuration.
> What do we what build to offer us, except for building?
>
> 1. [must] Package bundles so OSGi users are happy (have it)
Right now I think the OSGi bundles are OK, but I do agree with you that
we can probably aggregate some of them. The current build issues are
mostly related to the all-in-one OSGi bundles we are generating under
trunk/modules/bundles
The main issues there is the anrun plugin that is quite bougus IMO when
it is time to aggregate the src and javadoc of the aggregated modules. I
had a hard time making it working but I do still see failure with
strange exception. I would think this is the first place to look at.
> 2. [nice] Hudson should be able to deploy generated artifacts from SNAPSHOTS to public repository (have it)
Yes it does it right now but fail because of the extremely poor java.net
infrastructure. We have a workaround now internally and we will move to
it so deployment stop being broken.
> 3. [nice] Do we want to have generated java doc stored in trunk (now), or have it generated and deployed to site while performing release? (could have)
I think the release profile is quite nice as javadoc & src are only
generated at that time.
One thing I would like to propose is as soon as a unit test fail and
breaks the build, we file a p1, include the test, so we can have
artifact generated.
What do you think?
A+
-- Jeanfrancois
>
> Please add things that you think/know of that should be in build or would be nice to have or could be improved,
> so later poms can be reviewed with this requirements in mind.
>
> Thanks for your help,
> Hubert