You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@maven.apache.org by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com> on 2008/12/18 16:15:58 UTC
Mixins (was Re: POM construction specification)
On Dec 18, 2008, at 6:17 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
> I mentioned an idea in my review that seems to have been overlooked. I
> think a regular .pom in the repository shouldn't be able to be used
> as a
> "mixin". We should keep inheritance and mixins separate. The way I
> would
> do it is with a new packaging type of mixin that would take another
> xml
> file like mixin.xml and deploy that to the repository, similar to a
> classified artifact. You have the mixin's pom and then the mixin
> itself.
> Only the mixin file can be used for inclusion in a <mixin> element.
> This
> way the mixin can be abstract and only contain the appropriate
> fragments, yet have a separate pom with all the info needed to build
> and
> deploy said mixin to a remote repository. Mixins are useless if they
> can't be put into a repo.
No, this wasn't overlooked. I hadn't thought of just using a new
packaging type. I was thinking of a different file extension but
using a new packaging type makes much more sense. However, I'm not
sure having a separate file is really necessary. Just requiring the
mixin to have a version, artifactId and groupId and having those be
ignored when injecting the mixin should be suficient. And having the
packaging type of mixin would also prevent the pom from being used in
any other way - unless, of course, we want to allow mixins to be able
to have a parent mixin.
>
>
> anyone wanna play a drinking game on the thread for each mixin
> mention?
> ;-)
No thanks. Too early in the morning :-)
Ralph
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Mixins (was Re: POM construction specification)
Posted by Shane Isbell <sh...@gmail.com>.
The Nixon is not crooked, it doesn't need processing.
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 10:08 AM, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2008/12/18 Brian Fox <br...@reply.infinity.nu>
>
> > filtering or processing of it? I think it's just better to keep
> processing
> > of the Nixon separate.
> >
> > --Brian (mobile)
>
>
> I don't know that you'll ever get to process the Nixon... the best you can
> do is get him to do is resign, but his successor will probably pardon him
> so
> you'll be unable to process him. ;-)
>
Re: Mixins (was Re: POM construction specification)
Posted by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>.
2008/12/18 Jason van Zyl <jv...@sonatype.com>
> On 18-Dec-08, at 3:02 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
>
>> Actually, I'm liking the Nixon name for these mixins
>>
> No chance.
>
So you're saying that chance is not a factor.... hmm sounds like a done deal
so!
Re: Mixins (was Re: POM construction specification)
Posted by Jason van Zyl <jv...@sonatype.com>.
LOL
On 18-Dec-08, at 3:07 PM, Shane Isbell wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 12:02 PM, Stephen Connolly <
> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Actually, I'm liking the Nixon name for these mixins
>
> Sure, why not? We can just call mavenized mixins, Nixons. Now I just
> need a
> big pen to start blacking out sections of the spec.
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
People develop abstractions by generalizing from concrete examples.
Every attempt to determine the correct abstraction on paper without
actually developing a running system is doomed to failure. No one
is that smart. A framework is a resuable design, so you develop it by
looking at the things it is supposed to be a design of. The more
examples
you look at, the more general your framework will be.
-- Ralph Johnson & Don Roberts, Patterns for Evolving Frameworks
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Mixins (was Re: POM construction specification)
Posted by Shane Isbell <sh...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 12:02 PM, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
> Actually, I'm liking the Nixon name for these mixins
Sure, why not? We can just call mavenized mixins, Nixons. Now I just need a
big pen to start blacking out sections of the spec.
Re: Mixins (was Re: POM construction specification)
Posted by Jason van Zyl <jv...@sonatype.com>.
On 18-Dec-08, at 3:02 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> Actually, I'm liking the Nixon name for these mixins
>
No chance.
> 2008/12/18 Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
>
>>
>> On Dec 18, 2008, at 9:56 AM, Brian Fox wrote:
>>
>> It's not just about ignorig the ids. What about the distmgt info that
>>> would be needed to deploy... Or filtering or processing of it? I
>>> think it's
>>> just better to keep processing of the Nixon separate.
>>>
>>>
>> Yes, I agree (except with the Nixon name). I just used the
>> coordinates as
>> an example.
>>
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>>
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
Our achievements speak for themselves. What we have to keep track
of are our failures, discouragements and doubts. We tend to forget
the past difficulties, the many false starts, and the painful
groping. We see our past achievements as the end result of a
clean forward thrust, and our present difficulties as
signs of decline and decay.
-- Eric Hoffer, Reflections on the Human Condition
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Mixins (was Re: POM construction specification)
Posted by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>.
Actually, I'm liking the Nixon name for these mixins
2008/12/18 Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
>
> On Dec 18, 2008, at 9:56 AM, Brian Fox wrote:
>
> It's not just about ignorig the ids. What about the distmgt info that
>> would be needed to deploy... Or filtering or processing of it? I think it's
>> just better to keep processing of the Nixon separate.
>>
>>
> Yes, I agree (except with the Nixon name). I just used the coordinates as
> an example.
>
>
> Ralph
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
RE: Mixins (was Re: POM construction specification)
Posted by "Brian E. Fox" <br...@reply.infinity.nu>.
Gotta love Iphone autocorrect ;-)
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Connolly [mailto:stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 1:09 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: Mixins (was Re: POM construction specification)
2008/12/18 Brian Fox <br...@reply.infinity.nu>
> filtering or processing of it? I think it's just better to keep
processing
> of the Nixon separate.
>
> --Brian (mobile)
I don't know that you'll ever get to process the Nixon... the best you
can
do is get him to do is resign, but his successor will probably pardon
him so
you'll be unable to process him. ;-)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Mixins (was Re: POM construction specification)
Posted by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>.
2008/12/18 Brian Fox <br...@reply.infinity.nu>
> filtering or processing of it? I think it's just better to keep processing
> of the Nixon separate.
>
> --Brian (mobile)
I don't know that you'll ever get to process the Nixon... the best you can
do is get him to do is resign, but his successor will probably pardon him so
you'll be unable to process him. ;-)
Re: Mixins (was Re: POM construction specification)
Posted by Jason van Zyl <jv...@sonatype.com>.
I think mixins are important, but I think in the short term trying to
focus on bring the spec up to what is known to be the behavior right
now is the focus. Once all those tests are done and the spec is
comprehensive with an appendix, has example, and where tests refer to
sections in the POM then I think we can move on to new features and
changes. It's too early right now.
On 18-Dec-08, at 10:15 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> On Dec 18, 2008, at 6:17 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
>
>> I mentioned an idea in my review that seems to have been
>> overlooked. I
>> think a regular .pom in the repository shouldn't be able to be used
>> as a
>> "mixin". We should keep inheritance and mixins separate. The way I
>> would
>> do it is with a new packaging type of mixin that would take another
>> xml
>> file like mixin.xml and deploy that to the repository, similar to a
>> classified artifact. You have the mixin's pom and then the mixin
>> itself.
>> Only the mixin file can be used for inclusion in a <mixin> element.
>> This
>> way the mixin can be abstract and only contain the appropriate
>> fragments, yet have a separate pom with all the info needed to
>> build and
>> deploy said mixin to a remote repository. Mixins are useless if they
>> can't be put into a repo.
>
> No, this wasn't overlooked. I hadn't thought of just using a new
> packaging type. I was thinking of a different file extension but
> using a new packaging type makes much more sense. However, I'm not
> sure having a separate file is really necessary. Just requiring the
> mixin to have a version, artifactId and groupId and having those be
> ignored when injecting the mixin should be suficient. And having the
> packaging type of mixin would also prevent the pom from being used
> in any other way - unless, of course, we want to allow mixins to be
> able to have a parent mixin.
>>
>>
>> anyone wanna play a drinking game on the thread for each mixin
>> mention?
>> ;-)
>
> No thanks. Too early in the morning :-)
>
> Ralph
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational
and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it.
-- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Mixins (was Re: POM construction specification)
Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>.
On Dec 18, 2008, at 9:56 AM, Brian Fox wrote:
> It's not just about ignorig the ids. What about the distmgt info
> that would be needed to deploy... Or filtering or processing of it?
> I think it's just better to keep processing of the Nixon separate.
>
Yes, I agree (except with the Nixon name). I just used the coordinates
as an example.
Ralph
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Mixins (was Re: POM construction specification)
Posted by Brian Fox <br...@reply.infinity.nu>.
It's not just about ignorig the ids. What about the distmgt info that
would be needed to deploy... Or filtering or processing of it? I think
it's just better to keep processing of the Nixon separate.
--Brian (mobile)
On Dec 18, 2008, at 10:15 AM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
wrote:
>
> On Dec 18, 2008, at 6:17 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
>
>> I mentioned an idea in my review that seems to have been
>> overlooked. I
>> think a regular .pom in the repository shouldn't be able to be used
>> as a
>> "mixin". We should keep inheritance and mixins separate. The way I
>> would
>> do it is with a new packaging type of mixin that would take another
>> xml
>> file like mixin.xml and deploy that to the repository, similar to a
>> classified artifact. You have the mixin's pom and then the mixin
>> itself.
>> Only the mixin file can be used for inclusion in a <mixin> element.
>> This
>> way the mixin can be abstract and only contain the appropriate
>> fragments, yet have a separate pom with all the info needed to
>> build and
>> deploy said mixin to a remote repository. Mixins are useless if they
>> can't be put into a repo.
>
> No, this wasn't overlooked. I hadn't thought of just using a new
> packaging type. I was thinking of a different file extension but
> using a new packaging type makes much more sense. However, I'm not
> sure having a separate file is really necessary. Just requiring the
> mixin to have a version, artifactId and groupId and having those be
> ignored when injecting the mixin should be suficient. And having the
> packaging type of mixin would also prevent the pom from being used
> in any other way - unless, of course, we want to allow mixins to be
> able to have a parent mixin.
>>
>>
>> anyone wanna play a drinking game on the thread for each mixin
>> mention?
>> ;-)
>
> No thanks. Too early in the morning :-)
>
> Ralph
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org