Martin Grotzke wrote:
>> I think we should use the jersey/maven/pom.xml as a starting point
>> (which defers to ant) and use the jersey/pom.xml (that Doug has done)
>> as the goal to head towards (i.e. doing everything in maven). We can
>> keep the existing build.xml in place without modification so we do not
>> break anything.
> This would be good.
>
> Why do you want to have a jersey/pom.xml? Why is jersey/maven/pom.xml
> not sufficient?
Because i forgot that "jersey/maven/pom.xml" was there and Doug has done
some good work on a more maven like maven pom.xml that he committed
recently to "jersey/pom.xml".
> Having build.xml directly in jersey and pom.xml in jersey/maven shows
> what is the "primary" build tool. Having pom.xml directly in jersey I
> would prefer to do the build with maven and not to invoke some ant
> stuff.
>
I think we should move "jersey/pom.xml" to
"jersey/maven/pom-less-ant.xml", or something like that, so we don't
loose it.
> So I would suggest to keep the whole jersey build as it is, see above.
>
> Then if you want to switch to maven I would create a pom.xml that does
> not depend on ant.
>
>
>> Perhaps you could look at the trunk/jersey/maven/pom.xml and see if
>> that is sufficient for our needs. Then we could have have a
>> trunk/pom.xml that would invoke the trunk/jersey/maven/pom.xml and the
>> trunk/contrib/spring/pom.xml. For the jersey-spring Hudson task we can
>> obtain the built snapshot of jersey and do the jersey/maven/pom.xml
>> install and then it can checkout/build/run/test the contrib/spring
>> stuff.
> Obtaining stuff from somewhere sound like manual work, the concepts of
> maven are different: maven uses the maven-repo, dependencies are fetched
> automatically.
OK. So you think we should push jersey SNAPSHOT artifacts to the
java.net maven repo for every set of commits detected? (like we do for
the jersey.zip distribution to java.net)
>
>
>> Does that sound like a plan?
> Hmm, I would do it like this:
> - don't touch jersey build scripts
OK.
> - add a hudson job for "mvn install" with jersey/maven/pom.xml
> ("mvn-install-jersey")
> - add a hudson job for "mvn install" with jersey/contribs/spring/pom.xml
> ("mvn-install-jersey-spring")
> - add two post-build actions to the "ant-build-jersey" hudson job:
> - mvn-install-jersey
> - mvn-install-jersey-spring
>
> What do you think?
>
I don't see the point of the another "mvn-install-jersey" if we are
already building Jersey with Hudson. We easily can modify the existing
Jersey build hudson job to execute mvn install, as long as that results
in the jersey-*.zips being generated as well (so they get pushed to
java.net). Perhaps we could modify the package phase to call "ant dist"
then we are fully backwards compatible with the generated bits?
Note the 311 and jersey poms currently reference the java.net maven 1
repo, so we should change that to use the maven 2 repo. Actually do we
need to do "mvn deploy" to push stuff to the maven 2 repo?
>
>> After that we need to split Jersey into separate modules each with
>> their own pom.xml. I would like to use grizzly.dev.java.net as the
>> template we copy (i have been looking at how that works with help from
>> Jeanfrancois). Grizzly provides a jar per-module as well as jars for
>> bundles of modules. We can have a bundle for jersey.jar as well as say
>> jersey-runtime.jar, jersey-servlet.jar, jersey-json.jar etc.
> Ok. I would suggest that we discuss how to restructure jersey after the
> jersey-spring build is configured/integrated, ok?
>
Yes.
Paul.
--
| ? + ? = To question
----------------\
Paul Sandoz
x38109
+33-4-76188109