You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Daniel Kulp <da...@iona.com> on 2007/02/22 11:08:14 UTC
[DISCUSS]Incubator podling mvn pom files...
While looking at the Trinidad stuff, I had some thoughts about requirements
around pom files for Apache stuff and what "requirements" should be imposed.
There are several things in a pom file that could affect how things appear
when someone takes a dependency on an Apache project. Thus, we need to make
sure these things are correct:
1) organization element: Somewhere up the heirarchy, we need to have:
<organization>
<name>The Apache Software Foundation</name>
<url>http://www.apache.org/</url>
</organization>
2) licenses element: Somewhere up the heirarchy, we need to have:
<licenses>
<license>
<name>The Apache Software License, Version 2.0</name>
<url>http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt</url>
<distribution>repo</distribution>
</license>
</licenses>
NOTE: Both (1) and (2) can be taken care of by having the org.apache:apache:3
artifact as the parent. Should that be a requirement? (Actually, should
there be an incubator parent that lives in the middle?)
3) <name> Element - I think these should start with "Apache PODLING". The
basic reasoning for this is when someone runs a dependency report or similar,
the name is printed. We really need to make sure they see the proper Apache
branded name there. For example (not to pick on anybody in particular, this
is just the first of many examples I found), if I depend on commons-logging,
my report just says:
Logging
Commons Logging is a thin adapter allowing configurable bridging to other,
well known logging systems.
I think we should make sure the proper Apache branding is used.
4) <url> element should be there and point to the proper homepage
5) (optional) <inceptionYear> element filled in. (remote-resources uses this
for copyright dates)
The Maven team has been working on creating new tools and such that use all of
the above information when it's available. (one example is the
remote-resources stuff that can create the NOTICE files. Another example is
a tool that can check the licenses for all dependencies to make sure they all
match a certain list of "accepted" ones.) That said, there are a LOT of
crappy poms in the repository (*cough*sun jars*cough*) that the tools will
stumble on, but I think we should make sure all that information is there and
correct for our stuff.
Thoughts?
--
J. Daniel Kulp
Principal Engineer
IONA
P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194
daniel.kulp@iona.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS]Incubator podling mvn pom files...
Posted by Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org>.
If we end up switching to the main repos, then I think the pom would
be fairly empty as the values in apache:3 would be reusable. I still
think it is worth having as it ties the podling back to the offical
project that is doing the releases.
If we keep as we are, the repository, pluginRepository and
distributionManagement sections would be the main overrides. The
other sections (like site and project URLs) would be podling specific.
--
Jeremy
On Feb 22, 2007, at 9:29 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
> On Thursday 22 February 2007 06:14, Trustin Lee wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> 2007-02-22 (목), 05:08 -0500, Daniel Kulp 쓰시길:
>>> While looking at the Trinidad stuff, I had some thoughts about
>>> requirements around pom files for Apache stuff and what
>>> "requirements"
>>> should be imposed.
>>>
>>> There are several things in a pom file that could affect how things
>>> appear when someone takes a dependency on an Apache project.
>>> Thus, we
>>> need to make sure these things are correct:
>>>
>>> 1) organization element: Somewhere up the heirarchy, we need to
>>> have:
>>> <organization>
>>> <name>The Apache Software Foundation</name>
>>> <url>http://www.apache.org/</url>
>>> </organization>
>>
>> Shouldn't we specify http://incubator.apache.org/ for incubator
>> project
>> to state it's an incubator project?
>>
>> <snip/>
>>
>> I agree with the idea on extending a parent POM generally, but
>> org.apache:apache-incubator might be more reasonable for the projects
>> under incubation.
>
> I guess the question is: What would be different in the incubator
> pom from
> the apache:3 version?
>
> Possibilities:
> 1) <url>, but not really the organization.url as that's the URL for
> ASF, which
> is correct.
>
> 2) Deployment repository (m2-incubating-repository)- however, with the
> discussion started by Roy, that may be going away. Thus,
> potentially no
> difference.
>
> 3) Mailing list - general@i.a.o.
>
>
> I'd say once the IPMC gets #2 settled (good luck, I think this
> discussion
> comes up every 6 months), we could modify the one Jeremy created
> and get it
> out there for use.
>
> --
> J. Daniel Kulp
> Principal Engineer
> IONA
> P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194
> daniel.kulp@iona.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS]Incubator podling mvn pom files...
Posted by Daniel Kulp <da...@iona.com>.
On Thursday 22 February 2007 06:14, Trustin Lee wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2007-02-22 (목), 05:08 -0500, Daniel Kulp 쓰시길:
> > While looking at the Trinidad stuff, I had some thoughts about
> > requirements around pom files for Apache stuff and what "requirements"
> > should be imposed.
> >
> > There are several things in a pom file that could affect how things
> > appear when someone takes a dependency on an Apache project. Thus, we
> > need to make sure these things are correct:
> >
> > 1) organization element: Somewhere up the heirarchy, we need to have:
> > <organization>
> > <name>The Apache Software Foundation</name>
> > <url>http://www.apache.org/</url>
> > </organization>
>
> Shouldn't we specify http://incubator.apache.org/ for incubator project
> to state it's an incubator project?
>
> <snip/>
>
> I agree with the idea on extending a parent POM generally, but
> org.apache:apache-incubator might be more reasonable for the projects
> under incubation.
I guess the question is: What would be different in the incubator pom from
the apache:3 version?
Possibilities:
1) <url>, but not really the organization.url as that's the URL for ASF, which
is correct.
2) Deployment repository (m2-incubating-repository)- however, with the
discussion started by Roy, that may be going away. Thus, potentially no
difference.
3) Mailing list - general@i.a.o.
I'd say once the IPMC gets #2 settled (good luck, I think this discussion
comes up every 6 months), we could modify the one Jeremy created and get it
out there for use.
--
J. Daniel Kulp
Principal Engineer
IONA
P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194
daniel.kulp@iona.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS]Incubator podling mvn pom files...
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org>.
On 22 Feb 07, at 1:23 PM 22 Feb 07, Niklas Gustavsson wrote:
> Trustin Lee wrote:
>> I agree with the idea on extending a parent POM generally, but
>> org.apache:apache-incubator might be more reasonable for the projects
>> under incubation.
>
> I agree. Having an Incubator POM that includes the necessary stuff
> like
> the Maven remote resources, GPG and RAT plugin configuration would
> most
> certainly increase the quality of the metadata and binaries released
> from the Incubator. I'll be happy to help out with the effort.
>
Dan knows where all the stuff is in the Maven Project POM that has
all this configured, but I would like to see this go into the ASF POM
as this would mean that all projects using Maven 2.x at Apache would
have consistent releases simply by using the release plugin. Many
problems were found just by Dan trying to use the new release
toolchain and I imagine every last issue would be found 3 days after
a couple more projects tried to use the tool chain. Here's a little
diagram of how the remote resources plugin works. License and notice
templates effectively become shared resources that have project
specifics injected into a Velocity context before final rendering:
http://idisk.maven.org/jvanzyl/Public/RemoteResourcesHandling.png
Jason.
> /someone-whos-been-struggeling-with-getting-the-ftpserver-build-
> right-the-last-couple-of-days
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS]Incubator podling mvn pom files...
Posted by Niklas Gustavsson <ni...@protocol7.com>.
Trustin Lee wrote:
> I agree with the idea on extending a parent POM generally, but
> org.apache:apache-incubator might be more reasonable for the projects
> under incubation.
I agree. Having an Incubator POM that includes the necessary stuff like
the Maven remote resources, GPG and RAT plugin configuration would most
certainly increase the quality of the metadata and binaries released
from the Incubator. I'll be happy to help out with the effort.
/someone-whos-been-struggeling-with-getting-the-ftpserver-build-right-the-last-couple-of-days
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS]Incubator podling mvn pom files...
Posted by Trustin Lee <tr...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
2007-02-22 (목), 05:08 -0500, Daniel Kulp 쓰시길:
> While looking at the Trinidad stuff, I had some thoughts about requirements
> around pom files for Apache stuff and what "requirements" should be imposed.
>
> There are several things in a pom file that could affect how things appear
> when someone takes a dependency on an Apache project. Thus, we need to make
> sure these things are correct:
>
> 1) organization element: Somewhere up the heirarchy, we need to have:
> <organization>
> <name>The Apache Software Foundation</name>
> <url>http://www.apache.org/</url>
> </organization>
Shouldn't we specify http://incubator.apache.org/ for incubator project
to state it's an incubator project?
<snip/>
I agree with the idea on extending a parent POM generally, but
org.apache:apache-incubator might be more reasonable for the projects
under incubation.
Trustin
--
what we call human nature is actually human habit
--
http://gleamynode.net/
--
PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6
Re: [DISCUSS]Incubator podling mvn pom files...
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
I see
sounds nice
(I will add the <URL> to our trunk )
-M
On 2/22/07, Daniel Kulp <da...@iona.com> wrote:
> On Thursday 22 February 2007 05:30, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>
> > > 4) <url> element should be there and point to the proper homepage
> >
> > isn't <url> optional ?
>
> Yes, but with a proper URL, tools can point back to the project. Example is
> the dependency report which will provide a link back to the project. That's
> a good thing. That's why I'd like to see us use it.
>
> Also the remote-resources can produce nice stuff in the NOTICE file.
> Example:
>
> This product includes/uses software, Neethi (http://ws.apache.org/commons/neethi/),
> developed by Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/)
> License: The Apache Software License, Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt)
>
> (Again, I think it should be "Apache Neethi" or "Apache Commons - Neethi" or similar)
>
> --
> J. Daniel Kulp
> Principal Engineer
> IONA
> P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194
> daniel.kulp@iona.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS]Incubator podling mvn pom files...
Posted by Daniel Kulp <da...@iona.com>.
On Thursday 22 February 2007 05:30, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> > 4) <url> element should be there and point to the proper homepage
>
> isn't <url> optional ?
Yes, but with a proper URL, tools can point back to the project. Example is
the dependency report which will provide a link back to the project. That's
a good thing. That's why I'd like to see us use it.
Also the remote-resources can produce nice stuff in the NOTICE file.
Example:
This product includes/uses software, Neethi (http://ws.apache.org/commons/neethi/),
developed by Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/)
License: The Apache Software License, Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt)
(Again, I think it should be "Apache Neethi" or "Apache Commons - Neethi" or similar)
--
J. Daniel Kulp
Principal Engineer
IONA
P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194
daniel.kulp@iona.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS]Incubator podling mvn pom files...
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
> 1) organization element: Somewhere up the heirarchy, we need to have:
> <organization>
> <name>The Apache Software Foundation</name>
> <url>http://www.apache.org/</url>
> </organization>
> 2) licenses element: Somewhere up the heirarchy, we need to have:
> <licenses>
> <license>
> <name>The Apache Software License, Version 2.0</name>
> <url>http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt</url>
> <distribution>repo</distribution>
> </license>
> </licenses>
>
> NOTE: Both (1) and (2) can be taken care of by having the org.apache:apache:3
> artifact as the parent. Should that be a requirement? (Actually, should
> there be an incubator parent that lives in the middle?)
+1 to a requirement for "org.apache:apache:3" as being the parent.
I think it was already discussed the incubator parent thing. I am fine
w/ the "org.apache:apache:3" artifact.
> 3) <name> Element - I think these should start with "Apache PODLING". The
> basic reasoning for this is when someone runs a dependency report or similar,
> the name is printed. We really need to make sure they see the proper Apache
> branded name there. For example (not to pick on anybody in particular, this
> is just the first of many examples I found), if I depend on commons-logging,
> my report just says:
+1
> Logging
> Commons Logging is a thin adapter allowing configurable bridging to other,
> well known logging systems.
>
> I think we should make sure the proper Apache branding is used.
>
> 4) <url> element should be there and point to the proper homepage
isn't <url> optional ?
> 5) (optional) <inceptionYear> element filled in. (remote-resources uses this
> for copyright dates)
>
> The Maven team has been working on creating new tools and such that use all of
> the above information when it's available. (one example is the
> remote-resources stuff that can create the NOTICE files. Another example is
> a tool that can check the licenses for all dependencies to make sure they all
> match a certain list of "accepted" ones.) That said, there are a LOT of
> crappy poms in the repository (*cough*sun jars*cough*) that the tools will
> stumble on, but I think we should make sure all that information is there and
> correct for our stuff.
+1
(I hope the Trinidad stuff isn't that crappy ;))
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> J. Daniel Kulp
> Principal Engineer
> IONA
> P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194
> daniel.kulp@iona.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS]Incubator podling mvn pom files...
Posted by Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org>.
On Feb 22, 2007, at 2:08 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
> NOTE: Both (1) and (2) can be taken care of by having the
> org.apache:apache:3
> artifact as the parent. Should that be a requirement?
> (Actually, should
> there be an incubator parent that lives in the middle?)
I made a start on such a pom:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/pom/pom.xml
--
Jeremy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org