You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to jdo-dev@db.apache.org by Matthew Adams <ma...@matthewadams.me> on 2010/12/08 18:22:23 UTC
ant optional?
Hi guys,
I was just looking at the pom in trunk/api and noticed that on line 133, the
Ant dependency is declared optional. This is actually not true, as some of
the code in the test project can't compile without it. I propose removing
the <optional> line. Cool?
-matthew
--
mailto:matthew@matthewadams.me
skype:matthewadams12
yahoo:matthewadams
aol:matthewadams12
google-talk:matthewadams12@gmail.com<go...@gmail.com>
msn:matthew@matthewadams.me <ms...@matthewadams.me>
http://matthewadams.me
http://www.linkedin.com/in/matthewadams
Re: ant optional?
Posted by Matthew Adams <ma...@matthewadams.me>.
I can commit. Out of twin for weekend though. Will do next week.
Sent from mobile device. Responses brief.
On Dec 9, 2010, at 2:10 PM, Craig L Russell <cr...@oracle.com> wrote:
> Hi Matthew,
>
> Go ahead and commit or if you don't have commit access (I forget) then open a JIRA and attach a patch for one of us to commit.
>
> Craig
>
> On Dec 9, 2010, at 6:33 AM, Matthew Adams wrote:
>
>> Maven's test scope only means that it needs to be on the test classpath. It would not introduce a runtime or even compile time dependency of jdo-api.jar. Optional means that if Maven can't find it, compilation should still succeed, which it wouldn't if it weren't available. Again, <scope> and <optional> are orthogonal concerns.
>>
>> -Matthew
>>
>> Sent from mobile device. Responses brief.
>>
>> On Dec 9, 2010, at 1:24 AM, Andy Jefferson <an...@datanucleus.org> wrote:
>>
>>>> You do not want to mark it as not optional since IIRC that would mean that
>>>> anything building against jdo-api.jar would have to have ant in the
>>>> CLASSPATH. We do not want that.
>>>
>>> Although maybe the "test" scope would override that requirement?
>>>
>>> No subsititute for actually trying it with a clean M2 repo, and
>>> building/running a simple JDO project against it (with clean M2 repo also).
>>>
>>> --
>>> Andy
>>> DataNucleus (http://www.datanucleus.org)
>
> Craig L Russell
> Architect, Oracle
> http://db.apache.org/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
Re: ant optional?
Posted by Craig L Russell <cr...@oracle.com>.
Hi Matthew,
Go ahead and commit or if you don't have commit access (I forget) then
open a JIRA and attach a patch for one of us to commit.
Craig
On Dec 9, 2010, at 6:33 AM, Matthew Adams wrote:
> Maven's test scope only means that it needs to be on the test
> classpath. It would not introduce a runtime or even compile time
> dependency of jdo-api.jar. Optional means that if Maven can't find
> it, compilation should still succeed, which it wouldn't if it
> weren't available. Again, <scope> and <optional> are orthogonal
> concerns.
>
> -Matthew
>
> Sent from mobile device. Responses brief.
>
> On Dec 9, 2010, at 1:24 AM, Andy Jefferson <an...@datanucleus.org>
> wrote:
>
>>> You do not want to mark it as not optional since IIRC that would
>>> mean that
>>> anything building against jdo-api.jar would have to have ant in the
>>> CLASSPATH. We do not want that.
>>
>> Although maybe the "test" scope would override that requirement?
>>
>> No subsititute for actually trying it with a clean M2 repo, and
>> building/running a simple JDO project against it (with clean M2
>> repo also).
>>
>> --
>> Andy
>> DataNucleus (http://www.datanucleus.org)
Craig L Russell
Architect, Oracle
http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: ant optional?
Posted by Matthew Adams <ma...@matthewadams.me>.
Maven's test scope only means that it needs to be on the test classpath. It would not introduce a runtime or even compile time dependency of jdo-api.jar. Optional means that if Maven can't find it, compilation should still succeed, which it wouldn't if it weren't available. Again, <scope> and <optional> are orthogonal concerns.
-Matthew
Sent from mobile device. Responses brief.
On Dec 9, 2010, at 1:24 AM, Andy Jefferson <an...@datanucleus.org> wrote:
>> You do not want to mark it as not optional since IIRC that would mean that
>> anything building against jdo-api.jar would have to have ant in the
>> CLASSPATH. We do not want that.
>
> Although maybe the "test" scope would override that requirement?
>
> No subsititute for actually trying it with a clean M2 repo, and
> building/running a simple JDO project against it (with clean M2 repo also).
>
> --
> Andy
> DataNucleus (http://www.datanucleus.org)
Re: ant optional?
Posted by Andy Jefferson <an...@datanucleus.org>.
> You do not want to mark it as not optional since IIRC that would mean that
> anything building against jdo-api.jar would have to have ant in the
> CLASSPATH. We do not want that.
Although maybe the "test" scope would override that requirement?
No subsititute for actually trying it with a clean M2 repo, and
building/running a simple JDO project against it (with clean M2 repo also).
--
Andy
DataNucleus (http://www.datanucleus.org)
Re: ant optional?
Posted by Andy Jefferson <an...@datanucleus.org>.
> It already is. The scope is orthogonal to whether it's optional.
You do not want to mark it as not optional since IIRC that would mean that
anything building against jdo-api.jar would have to have ant in the CLASSPATH.
We do not want that.
--
Andy
DataNucleus (http://www.datanucleus.org)
Re: ant optional?
Posted by Matthew Adams <ma...@matthewadams.me>.
It already is. The scope is orthogonal to whether it's optional.
-matthew
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Craig L Russell <cr...@oracle.com>wrote:
>
> On Dec 8, 2010, at 9:22 AM, Matthew Adams wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>>
>> I was just looking at the pom in trunk/api and noticed that on line 133,
>> the
>> Ant dependency is declared optional. This is actually not true, as some
>> of
>> the code in the test project can't compile without it. I propose removing
>> the <optional> line. Cool?
>>
>
> The dependency should be marked "test" instead of "optional" then.
>
> Cool?
>
> Craig
>
>>
>> -matthew
>>
>> --
>> mailto:matthew@matthewadams.me
>> skype:matthewadams12
>> yahoo:matthewadams
>> aol:matthewadams12
>> google-talk:matthewadams12@gmail.com<go...@gmail.com>
>> <go...@gmail.com>
>> >
>> msn:matthew@matthewadams.me <ms...@matthewadams.me> <
>> msn%3Amatthew@matthewadams.me <ms...@matthewadams.me>>
>>
>> http://matthewadams.me
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/matthewadams
>>
>
> Craig L Russell
> Architect, Oracle
> http://db.apache.org/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
>
--
mailto:matthew@matthewadams.me
skype:matthewadams12
yahoo:matthewadams
aol:matthewadams12
google-talk:matthewadams12@gmail.com<go...@gmail.com>
msn:matthew@matthewadams.me <ms...@matthewadams.me>
http://matthewadams.me
http://www.linkedin.com/in/matthewadams
Re: ant optional?
Posted by Craig L Russell <cr...@oracle.com>.
On Dec 8, 2010, at 9:22 AM, Matthew Adams wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I was just looking at the pom in trunk/api and noticed that on line
> 133, the
> Ant dependency is declared optional. This is actually not true, as
> some of
> the code in the test project can't compile without it. I propose
> removing
> the <optional> line. Cool?
The dependency should be marked "test" instead of "optional" then.
Cool?
Craig
>
> -matthew
>
> --
> mailto:matthew@matthewadams.me
> skype:matthewadams12
> yahoo:matthewadams
> aol:matthewadams12
> google-talk:matthewadams12@gmail.com<google-talk%3Amatthewadams12@gmail.com
> >
> msn:matthew@matthewadams.me <ms...@matthewadams.me>
> http://matthewadams.me
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/matthewadams
Craig L Russell
Architect, Oracle
http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!