You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@struts.apache.org by Don Brown <mr...@twdata.org> on 2005/02/23 02:09:31 UTC
Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Sorry to raise this controversial subject, but I feel our build
situation is getting a little out of control. We have maven and ant
build files scattered throughout our repository, making it very
confusing to determine which is "official" and which is "experimental".
Even our documentation is fragemented with /doc and /xdoc directories
containing unsynchronized, mostly identical content.
I think we need to just pick one and get rid of the other. I know for
some this is like deciding the meaning of life, but I think we need to
just pick one and remove the other or at least move it to an unsupported
sandbox area. Struts may currently be in a state where it wants to try
different ideas and see which ones "win", but the build environment
should "just work" and require little to no attention.
Personally, I very much perfer Ant and find Maven slow, buggy, and
overextended, however, it seems those that have been volunteering on the
build lately perfer Maven, so I vote we go with Maven, convert all the
docs to xdocs, and clean the Ant-related files out completely.
Of course, I am willing to do whatever it takes to get this
accomplished. Let's get this, in my opinion, very boring and
unnecessarily confusing matter resolved so we can get back to the fun
stuff that is 1.3 and beyond.
Don
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Kris Schneider <kr...@dotech.com>.
Quoting Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>:
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 12:45:02 -0500, Kris Schneider <kr...@dotech.com> wrote:
> > "request-time" really is the correct interpretation of "rtexprvalue"...
>
> No, "request-time" would be the correct interpretation of "rt". By
> itself, it is meaningless. All actual attribute values are determined
> at request time, whether they are specified by expressions or not.
> "Request-time expression value" or maybe "Request-time expression",
> but not just "Request-time".
Yes, of course. "Request-time expression value" would be it. I was merely
pointing out that "Request-time" is a perfectly correct label for the column in
question.
> --
> Martin Cooper
>
>
> > Quoting Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:15:02 -0600, Joe Germuska <Jo...@germuska.com>
> wrote:
> > > > At 7:14 AM -0500 2/23/05, James Mitchell wrote:
> > > > >I don't think that's what Joe was saying.
> > > > >
> > > > >Unless I'm mistaken, he means that the javadoc-like docs are
> > > > >generated from the actual TLDs.
> > > > >
> > > > >So, instead of this:
> > > > >
> > > > > ,-> struts-*.html
> > > > >struts-*.xml-
> > > > > '-> struts-*.tld
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >...he means this:
> > > > >
> > > > >struts-*.tld -> struts-*.html (javadoc-like format)
> > > > >
> > > > >These javadoc-like docs would be directly linked as part of the
> > > documentation.
> > > > >
> > > > >Is this right Joe?
> > > >
> > > > It's true; the javadoc-like docs are generated from TLDs using
> > > > TagLibraryDoc: https://taglibrarydoc.dev.java.net/
> > > >
> > > > So only one file (per tag library) would be maintained: it's just
> > > > that rather than it being a source for TLDs, which could also be used
> > > > to produce documentation, it would *be* the TLD. So rather than
> > > > having one Struts-custom XML file used to generate two documents,
> > > > we'd have one standard TLD file used to generate (through a
> > > > potentially more "standard" library) tag documentation.
> > > >
> > > > Besides some formatting, the language should be identical to what we
> > > > currently have on the userGuide pages.
> > > >
> > > > I wouldn't say I'm "lobbying" for this, but I do like the idea of one
> > > > less transformation. I mostly just wanted to see how it worked; I'd
> > > > been using Sun's online JSTL 1.1 doc (generated with the same tool)
> > > > for a while but hadn't generated my own.
> > >
> > > Ah, OK, now I get it. Well, the idea is good, and I wouldn't really
> > > mind the change to a Javadoc-like format, but I do see some problems.
> > >
> > > For one, there's a lot of formatting info that got dropped on the
> > > floor. I'm not sure if that's a GIGO issue or a problem with the tool,
> > > but we'd need to fix it somehow.
> > >
> > > The other problem is what appears to be a bug in the tool. It produces
> > > a column labelled "Request-time", which I think is supposed to
> > > represent 'rtexprvalue', and so should be "Runtime expression"
> > > instead.
> > >
> > > If we can resolve both of these, and the results look OK, then I'd be
> > > fine with switching to this approach.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Martin Cooper
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > http://java.sun.com/products/jsp/jstl/1.1/docs/tlddocs/
> > > >
> > > > Joe
> > > > --
> > > > Joe Germuska
> > > > Joe@Germuska.com
> > > > http://blog.germuska.com
> > > > "Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex
> >
> > --
> > Kris Schneider <ma...@dotech.com>
> > D.O.Tech <http://www.dotech.com/>
--
Kris Schneider <ma...@dotech.com>
D.O.Tech <http://www.dotech.com/>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 12:45:02 -0500, Kris Schneider <kr...@dotech.com> wrote:
> "request-time" really is the correct interpretation of "rtexprvalue"...
No, "request-time" would be the correct interpretation of "rt". By
itself, it is meaningless. All actual attribute values are determined
at request time, whether they are specified by expressions or not.
"Request-time expression value" or maybe "Request-time expression",
but not just "Request-time".
--
Martin Cooper
> Quoting Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>:
>
> > On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:15:02 -0600, Joe Germuska <Jo...@germuska.com> wrote:
> > > At 7:14 AM -0500 2/23/05, James Mitchell wrote:
> > > >I don't think that's what Joe was saying.
> > > >
> > > >Unless I'm mistaken, he means that the javadoc-like docs are
> > > >generated from the actual TLDs.
> > > >
> > > >So, instead of this:
> > > >
> > > > ,-> struts-*.html
> > > >struts-*.xml-
> > > > '-> struts-*.tld
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >...he means this:
> > > >
> > > >struts-*.tld -> struts-*.html (javadoc-like format)
> > > >
> > > >These javadoc-like docs would be directly linked as part of the
> > documentation.
> > > >
> > > >Is this right Joe?
> > >
> > > It's true; the javadoc-like docs are generated from TLDs using
> > > TagLibraryDoc: https://taglibrarydoc.dev.java.net/
> > >
> > > So only one file (per tag library) would be maintained: it's just
> > > that rather than it being a source for TLDs, which could also be used
> > > to produce documentation, it would *be* the TLD. So rather than
> > > having one Struts-custom XML file used to generate two documents,
> > > we'd have one standard TLD file used to generate (through a
> > > potentially more "standard" library) tag documentation.
> > >
> > > Besides some formatting, the language should be identical to what we
> > > currently have on the userGuide pages.
> > >
> > > I wouldn't say I'm "lobbying" for this, but I do like the idea of one
> > > less transformation. I mostly just wanted to see how it worked; I'd
> > > been using Sun's online JSTL 1.1 doc (generated with the same tool)
> > > for a while but hadn't generated my own.
> >
> > Ah, OK, now I get it. Well, the idea is good, and I wouldn't really
> > mind the change to a Javadoc-like format, but I do see some problems.
> >
> > For one, there's a lot of formatting info that got dropped on the
> > floor. I'm not sure if that's a GIGO issue or a problem with the tool,
> > but we'd need to fix it somehow.
> >
> > The other problem is what appears to be a bug in the tool. It produces
> > a column labelled "Request-time", which I think is supposed to
> > represent 'rtexprvalue', and so should be "Runtime expression"
> > instead.
> >
> > If we can resolve both of these, and the results look OK, then I'd be
> > fine with switching to this approach.
> >
> > --
> > Martin Cooper
> >
> >
> > >
> > > http://java.sun.com/products/jsp/jstl/1.1/docs/tlddocs/
> > >
> > > Joe
> > > --
> > > Joe Germuska
> > > Joe@Germuska.com
> > > http://blog.germuska.com
> > > "Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex
>
> --
> Kris Schneider <ma...@dotech.com>
> D.O.Tech <http://www.dotech.com/>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Kris Schneider <kr...@dotech.com>.
"request-time" really is the correct interpretation of "rtexprvalue"...
Quoting Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>:
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:15:02 -0600, Joe Germuska <Jo...@germuska.com> wrote:
> > At 7:14 AM -0500 2/23/05, James Mitchell wrote:
> > >I don't think that's what Joe was saying.
> > >
> > >Unless I'm mistaken, he means that the javadoc-like docs are
> > >generated from the actual TLDs.
> > >
> > >So, instead of this:
> > >
> > > ,-> struts-*.html
> > >struts-*.xml-
> > > '-> struts-*.tld
> > >
> > >
> > >...he means this:
> > >
> > >struts-*.tld -> struts-*.html (javadoc-like format)
> > >
> > >These javadoc-like docs would be directly linked as part of the
> documentation.
> > >
> > >Is this right Joe?
> >
> > It's true; the javadoc-like docs are generated from TLDs using
> > TagLibraryDoc: https://taglibrarydoc.dev.java.net/
> >
> > So only one file (per tag library) would be maintained: it's just
> > that rather than it being a source for TLDs, which could also be used
> > to produce documentation, it would *be* the TLD. So rather than
> > having one Struts-custom XML file used to generate two documents,
> > we'd have one standard TLD file used to generate (through a
> > potentially more "standard" library) tag documentation.
> >
> > Besides some formatting, the language should be identical to what we
> > currently have on the userGuide pages.
> >
> > I wouldn't say I'm "lobbying" for this, but I do like the idea of one
> > less transformation. I mostly just wanted to see how it worked; I'd
> > been using Sun's online JSTL 1.1 doc (generated with the same tool)
> > for a while but hadn't generated my own.
>
> Ah, OK, now I get it. Well, the idea is good, and I wouldn't really
> mind the change to a Javadoc-like format, but I do see some problems.
>
> For one, there's a lot of formatting info that got dropped on the
> floor. I'm not sure if that's a GIGO issue or a problem with the tool,
> but we'd need to fix it somehow.
>
> The other problem is what appears to be a bug in the tool. It produces
> a column labelled "Request-time", which I think is supposed to
> represent 'rtexprvalue', and so should be "Runtime expression"
> instead.
>
> If we can resolve both of these, and the results look OK, then I'd be
> fine with switching to this approach.
>
> --
> Martin Cooper
>
>
> >
> > http://java.sun.com/products/jsp/jstl/1.1/docs/tlddocs/
> >
> > Joe
> > --
> > Joe Germuska
> > Joe@Germuska.com
> > http://blog.germuska.com
> > "Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex
--
Kris Schneider <ma...@dotech.com>
D.O.Tech <http://www.dotech.com/>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:15:02 -0600, Joe Germuska <Jo...@germuska.com> wrote:
> At 7:14 AM -0500 2/23/05, James Mitchell wrote:
> >I don't think that's what Joe was saying.
> >
> >Unless I'm mistaken, he means that the javadoc-like docs are
> >generated from the actual TLDs.
> >
> >So, instead of this:
> >
> > ,-> struts-*.html
> >struts-*.xml-
> > '-> struts-*.tld
> >
> >
> >...he means this:
> >
> >struts-*.tld -> struts-*.html (javadoc-like format)
> >
> >These javadoc-like docs would be directly linked as part of the documentation.
> >
> >Is this right Joe?
>
> It's true; the javadoc-like docs are generated from TLDs using
> TagLibraryDoc: https://taglibrarydoc.dev.java.net/
>
> So only one file (per tag library) would be maintained: it's just
> that rather than it being a source for TLDs, which could also be used
> to produce documentation, it would *be* the TLD. So rather than
> having one Struts-custom XML file used to generate two documents,
> we'd have one standard TLD file used to generate (through a
> potentially more "standard" library) tag documentation.
>
> Besides some formatting, the language should be identical to what we
> currently have on the userGuide pages.
>
> I wouldn't say I'm "lobbying" for this, but I do like the idea of one
> less transformation. I mostly just wanted to see how it worked; I'd
> been using Sun's online JSTL 1.1 doc (generated with the same tool)
> for a while but hadn't generated my own.
Ah, OK, now I get it. Well, the idea is good, and I wouldn't really
mind the change to a Javadoc-like format, but I do see some problems.
For one, there's a lot of formatting info that got dropped on the
floor. I'm not sure if that's a GIGO issue or a problem with the tool,
but we'd need to fix it somehow.
The other problem is what appears to be a bug in the tool. It produces
a column labelled "Request-time", which I think is supposed to
represent 'rtexprvalue', and so should be "Runtime expression"
instead.
If we can resolve both of these, and the results look OK, then I'd be
fine with switching to this approach.
--
Martin Cooper
>
> http://java.sun.com/products/jsp/jstl/1.1/docs/tlddocs/
>
> Joe
> --
> Joe Germuska
> Joe@Germuska.com
> http://blog.germuska.com
> "Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Joe Germuska <Jo...@Germuska.com>.
At 7:14 AM -0500 2/23/05, James Mitchell wrote:
>I don't think that's what Joe was saying.
>
>Unless I'm mistaken, he means that the javadoc-like docs are
>generated from the actual TLDs.
>
>So, instead of this:
>
> ,-> struts-*.html
>struts-*.xml-
> '-> struts-*.tld
>
>
>...he means this:
>
>struts-*.tld -> struts-*.html (javadoc-like format)
>
>These javadoc-like docs would be directly linked as part of the documentation.
>
>Is this right Joe?
It's true; the javadoc-like docs are generated from TLDs using
TagLibraryDoc: https://taglibrarydoc.dev.java.net/
So only one file (per tag library) would be maintained: it's just
that rather than it being a source for TLDs, which could also be used
to produce documentation, it would *be* the TLD. So rather than
having one Struts-custom XML file used to generate two documents,
we'd have one standard TLD file used to generate (through a
potentially more "standard" library) tag documentation.
Besides some formatting, the language should be identical to what we
currently have on the userGuide pages.
I wouldn't say I'm "lobbying" for this, but I do like the idea of one
less transformation. I mostly just wanted to see how it worked; I'd
been using Sun's online JSTL 1.1 doc (generated with the same tool)
for a while but hadn't generated my own.
http://java.sun.com/products/jsp/jstl/1.1/docs/tlddocs/
Joe
--
Joe Germuska
Joe@Germuska.com
http://blog.germuska.com
"Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org>.
I don't think that's what Joe was saying.
Unless I'm mistaken, he means that the javadoc-like docs are generated from
the actual TLDs.
So, instead of this:
,-> struts-*.html
struts-*.xml-
'-> struts-*.tld
...he means this:
struts-*.tld -> struts-*.html (javadoc-like format)
These javadoc-like docs would be directly linked as part of the
documentation.
Is this right Joe?
--
James Mitchell
Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
EdgeTech, Inc.
678.910.8017
AIM: jmitchtx
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Cooper" <mf...@gmail.com>
To: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 11:46 PM
Subject: Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
> On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 22:25:11 -0600, Joe Germuska <Jo...@germuska.com> wrote:
>> >I would like to move us to using the standard Maven doc generation
>> >mechanism, so that we get the benefit of all that site generation and
>> >reporting that Maven does for us. (In fact, I see that as one of the
>> >major advantages of moving to Maven.) Unless I'm mistaken, that means
>> >converting our docs to the XML format that Maven understands. (This is
>> >what the existing xdocs directory was an initial stab at.)
>> >
>> >The way we generate TLDs today - using either Ant or Maven - depends
>> >on an XML format of our own invention along with our own stylesheet.
>> >If we switch to Maven's xdocs, then we won't have that, and I doubt
>> >we'd have the luxury of simply dropping our own XML elements into the
>> >xdocs files for the purpose.
>> >
>> >My expectation is that we would need to "extend" the Maven format to
>> >make it suitable for generating TLDs, and then use a (proably trivial)
>> >XSLT stylesheet to morph that to standard Maven prior to site
>> >generation. One thing I certainly want to retain is generating the tag
>> >docs and the TLDs from the same source.
>> >
>> >If I'm missing something here, and we don't need to do what I'm
>> >expecting, I'd be happy to be set straight. ;-)
>>
>> I don't think it's so complicated. Check out
>> http://www.apache.org/~germuska/struts-taglib/docs/tlddoc/ and see if
>> it's even roughly acceptable as an alternative to
>> http://struts.apache.org/userGuide/struts-bean.html
>>
>> To make this work, we do a one time generation of the TLD files and
>> store them in the repository -- the maven taglib plugin defaults to
>> looking for them in src/tld, and that's where (for example), the
>> displaytag project keeps them. We would then need to modify the JAR
>> compilation process to include the TLDs in the JAR; this is a trivial
>> copy postGoal in maven.xml, and we might even just be able to declare
>> src/tld as another "Resource" directory, in which case they would
>> automatically be copied. (in my test, the TLDs were in src/tld
>> directly, not src/tld/META-INF/tlds).
>>
>> I haven't looked at generating the traditional (userGuide) doc from
>> the maven xdoc plugin, but you're right -- that's probably not quite
>> so simple.
>
> I think I'm still missing something. The link you provided shows tag
> docs that appear to have been generated from the Javadoc comments.
> That's not what we want (or at least not what I want ;). To guarantee
> that the docs are in sync with the TLDs, I want to continue to
> generate both the docs and the TLDs from the exact same XML file.
>
> I don't want to switch to generating these from Javadocs, because then
> we either end up embedding Maven-specific XML markup in the Java
> files, or we lose the ability to use some of the nice Maven formatting
> options (such as boxes for examples).
>
> --
> Martin Cooper
>
>
>> Joe
>>
>> --
>> Joe Germuska
>> Joe@Germuska.com
>> http://blog.germuska.com
>> "Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 22:25:11 -0600, Joe Germuska <Jo...@germuska.com> wrote:
> >I would like to move us to using the standard Maven doc generation
> >mechanism, so that we get the benefit of all that site generation and
> >reporting that Maven does for us. (In fact, I see that as one of the
> >major advantages of moving to Maven.) Unless I'm mistaken, that means
> >converting our docs to the XML format that Maven understands. (This is
> >what the existing xdocs directory was an initial stab at.)
> >
> >The way we generate TLDs today - using either Ant or Maven - depends
> >on an XML format of our own invention along with our own stylesheet.
> >If we switch to Maven's xdocs, then we won't have that, and I doubt
> >we'd have the luxury of simply dropping our own XML elements into the
> >xdocs files for the purpose.
> >
> >My expectation is that we would need to "extend" the Maven format to
> >make it suitable for generating TLDs, and then use a (proably trivial)
> >XSLT stylesheet to morph that to standard Maven prior to site
> >generation. One thing I certainly want to retain is generating the tag
> >docs and the TLDs from the same source.
> >
> >If I'm missing something here, and we don't need to do what I'm
> >expecting, I'd be happy to be set straight. ;-)
>
> I don't think it's so complicated. Check out
> http://www.apache.org/~germuska/struts-taglib/docs/tlddoc/ and see if
> it's even roughly acceptable as an alternative to
> http://struts.apache.org/userGuide/struts-bean.html
>
> To make this work, we do a one time generation of the TLD files and
> store them in the repository -- the maven taglib plugin defaults to
> looking for them in src/tld, and that's where (for example), the
> displaytag project keeps them. We would then need to modify the JAR
> compilation process to include the TLDs in the JAR; this is a trivial
> copy postGoal in maven.xml, and we might even just be able to declare
> src/tld as another "Resource" directory, in which case they would
> automatically be copied. (in my test, the TLDs were in src/tld
> directly, not src/tld/META-INF/tlds).
>
> I haven't looked at generating the traditional (userGuide) doc from
> the maven xdoc plugin, but you're right -- that's probably not quite
> so simple.
I think I'm still missing something. The link you provided shows tag
docs that appear to have been generated from the Javadoc comments.
That's not what we want (or at least not what I want ;). To guarantee
that the docs are in sync with the TLDs, I want to continue to
generate both the docs and the TLDs from the exact same XML file.
I don't want to switch to generating these from Javadocs, because then
we either end up embedding Maven-specific XML markup in the Java
files, or we lose the ability to use some of the nice Maven formatting
options (such as boxes for examples).
--
Martin Cooper
> Joe
>
> --
> Joe Germuska
> Joe@Germuska.com
> http://blog.germuska.com
> "Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Joe Germuska <Jo...@Germuska.com>.
>I would like to move us to using the standard Maven doc generation
>mechanism, so that we get the benefit of all that site generation and
>reporting that Maven does for us. (In fact, I see that as one of the
>major advantages of moving to Maven.) Unless I'm mistaken, that means
>converting our docs to the XML format that Maven understands. (This is
>what the existing xdocs directory was an initial stab at.)
>
>The way we generate TLDs today - using either Ant or Maven - depends
>on an XML format of our own invention along with our own stylesheet.
>If we switch to Maven's xdocs, then we won't have that, and I doubt
>we'd have the luxury of simply dropping our own XML elements into the
>xdocs files for the purpose.
>
>My expectation is that we would need to "extend" the Maven format to
>make it suitable for generating TLDs, and then use a (proably trivial)
>XSLT stylesheet to morph that to standard Maven prior to site
>generation. One thing I certainly want to retain is generating the tag
>docs and the TLDs from the same source.
>
>If I'm missing something here, and we don't need to do what I'm
>expecting, I'd be happy to be set straight. ;-)
I don't think it's so complicated. Check out
http://www.apache.org/~germuska/struts-taglib/docs/tlddoc/ and see if
it's even roughly acceptable as an alternative to
http://struts.apache.org/userGuide/struts-bean.html
To make this work, we do a one time generation of the TLD files and
store them in the repository -- the maven taglib plugin defaults to
looking for them in src/tld, and that's where (for example), the
displaytag project keeps them. We would then need to modify the JAR
compilation process to include the TLDs in the JAR; this is a trivial
copy postGoal in maven.xml, and we might even just be able to declare
src/tld as another "Resource" directory, in which case they would
automatically be copied. (in my test, the TLDs were in src/tld
directly, not src/tld/META-INF/tlds).
I haven't looked at generating the traditional (userGuide) doc from
the maven xdoc plugin, but you're right -- that's probably not quite
so simple.
Joe
--
Joe Germuska
Joe@Germuska.com
http://blog.germuska.com
"Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 21:50:02 -0600, Joe Germuska <Jo...@germuska.com> wrote:
> >At this point, I don't know which one is ahead. Ant is closer on site
> >/ docs, but Maven is probably closer on an all-Struts build. If people
> >would prefer Ant, I'm quite willing to pick up where I left off with
> >that. I'm also happy to work on the Maven build, although I don't know
> >if James M has got far enough with the shared build stuff for other
> >people to work on it simultaneously. I'm not all that thrilled at the
> >prospect of working on both, though.
> >
> >The site / docs is something I do want to work on, and I've said as
> >much to James off-list more than once recently. One of the sticking
> >points with Maven is going to be how we deal with generating the TLDs,
> >which likely won't work from Maven xdocs. This is on my to-do list,
> >right after writing up a plan for site creation (which is at the top
> >of my list).
>
> I'm not quite sure what you're thinking of here; Maven already
> generates the TLD files for taglib and el now as part of achieving
> the "maven jar" goal.
I would like to move us to using the standard Maven doc generation
mechanism, so that we get the benefit of all that site generation and
reporting that Maven does for us. (In fact, I see that as one of the
major advantages of moving to Maven.) Unless I'm mistaken, that means
converting our docs to the XML format that Maven understands. (This is
what the existing xdocs directory was an initial stab at.)
The way we generate TLDs today - using either Ant or Maven - depends
on an XML format of our own invention along with our own stylesheet.
If we switch to Maven's xdocs, then we won't have that, and I doubt
we'd have the luxury of simply dropping our own XML elements into the
xdocs files for the purpose.
My expectation is that we would need to "extend" the Maven format to
make it suitable for generating TLDs, and then use a (proably trivial)
XSLT stylesheet to morph that to standard Maven prior to site
generation. One thing I certainly want to retain is generating the tag
docs and the TLDs from the same source.
If I'm missing something here, and we don't need to do what I'm
expecting, I'd be happy to be set straight. ;-)
--
Martin Cooper
> If anything about that turns out to be weird, we could also consider
> generating the TLDs one last time and making those the SVN controlled
> resource, and then generate doc from the TLD files using taglibdoc.
>
> I was just experimenting with that, and if people would like to
> review the output, they can visit:
> http://www.apache.org/~germuska/struts-taglib/docs/tlddoc/
>
> I made some mild mods to the XSL file we use to generate the TLDs to
> inline the doc; you'll see from reviewing that it's not perfect, and
> I'm not saying that it's better than the familiar old tag reference
> docs. But I'd been curious about using Maven and TLDDoc together for
> a while, and it turns out that it's pretty straightforward.
>
> Joe
>
> --
> Joe Germuska
> Joe@Germuska.com
> http://blog.germuska.com
> "Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Joe Germuska <Jo...@Germuska.com>.
>At this point, I don't know which one is ahead. Ant is closer on site
>/ docs, but Maven is probably closer on an all-Struts build. If people
>would prefer Ant, I'm quite willing to pick up where I left off with
>that. I'm also happy to work on the Maven build, although I don't know
>if James M has got far enough with the shared build stuff for other
>people to work on it simultaneously. I'm not all that thrilled at the
>prospect of working on both, though.
>
>The site / docs is something I do want to work on, and I've said as
>much to James off-list more than once recently. One of the sticking
>points with Maven is going to be how we deal with generating the TLDs,
>which likely won't work from Maven xdocs. This is on my to-do list,
>right after writing up a plan for site creation (which is at the top
>of my list).
I'm not quite sure what you're thinking of here; Maven already
generates the TLD files for taglib and el now as part of achieving
the "maven jar" goal.
If anything about that turns out to be weird, we could also consider
generating the TLDs one last time and making those the SVN controlled
resource, and then generate doc from the TLD files using taglibdoc.
I was just experimenting with that, and if people would like to
review the output, they can visit:
http://www.apache.org/~germuska/struts-taglib/docs/tlddoc/
I made some mild mods to the XSL file we use to generate the TLDs to
inline the doc; you'll see from reviewing that it's not perfect, and
I'm not saying that it's better than the familiar old tag reference
docs. But I'd been curious about using Maven and TLDDoc together for
a while, and it turns out that it's pretty straightforward.
Joe
--
Joe Germuska
Joe@Germuska.com
http://blog.germuska.com
"Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org>.
> As long as a new prospective developer can
> checkout Struts from subversion, just type "maven dist" and have the
> whole Struts project unit tested and built, I'll be happy.
That's exactly the goal (no pun intended ;) for me.
--
James Mitchell
Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
EdgeTech, Inc.
678.910.8017
AIM: jmitchtx
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Don Brown <mr...@twdata.org>.
To be honest, I too have my reservations towards Maven as I've been very
happy with Ant, but a project the depends on volunteers such as this
needs to more importantly pick one tool and use it consistently and
effectively. Furthermore, this tool must be supported by those that
will maintain the build. These two reasons cause me to call for Maven
to be selected as the sole build tool. The turning point for me was
seeing that I can embed ant tasks in the maven.xml and James' dedication
to getting Maven working. As long as a new prospective developer can
checkout Struts from subversion, just type "maven dist" and have the
whole Struts project unit tested and built, I'll be happy.
Don
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
> I had to toy with Maven on a project a few weeks back I was asked to
> look at and resolve some issues with. It felt very much like using CVS
> to me... Gets the job done, and you know there is a lot of power there,
> but for a beginner it feels like its fighting you. As with most new
> tools, familiarity gained over time would ease the difficulty to the
> point, hopefully, where the power shines through and you forget your
> initial difficulties.
>
> But those initial lumps stay with you a while :)
>
> I can't comment at all on the existing Ant builds as I never had cause
> to compile Struts myself. If the scripts are as you say, then it
> certainly lessens my argument somewhat :)
>
> As an aside, the irony here is that I wasn't thrilled with Ant at first
> either, but I've kind of taken a liking to it lately. For example, just
> last week I wrote a script that (1) stopped Tomcat (if running), (2) did
> some initialization tasks to prepare for the build, (3) updated a build
> number in an About screen JSP, (4) compiled about 200 source files, (5)
> compiled about 80 JSPs (to servlet and to class, just for verification
> purposes), (6) ran about 50 JUnit tests, (7) generated javadocs for the
> entire code base, (8) WARed the application, (9) deployed it under
> Tomcat (in exploded format, the WAR was created for manual deployment
> under Websphere), (10) deployed the javadocs to a documentation server,
> (11) cleaned up (both the build environment and deleted the Tomcat work
> folder) and (12) restarted Tomcat. The script to me is easy as hell to
> follow, doesn't require any outside configuration (you just have to
> update the build number in the build.xml file itself, which you are
> reminded about when the script is run) and runs in under 50 seconds on
> my 2-year old PC. I get output to the console as well as a log file
> too. Of course it was easy to set up for doing this (just had to add
> the junit.jar to the Ant folder, nothing else beyond the usual simple
> setup chores).
>
> I was actually doing the same thing with a DOS batch file previously,
> but now I can run my build under Linux, and its a little easier to
> follow I think. Call me an Ant convert :)
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Don Brown <mr...@twdata.org>.
Theoretically, yes, but I think they present more confusion than do
good. When you have two different build scripts, it is not only
confusing to the new developer (or any developer really), but a
maintainence headache as both have to be maintained. Ant scripts could
be created, but they should be stored way away in some sandbox or
contrib folder where they will be clearly marked as unsupported.
Don
Hubert Rabago wrote:
> Obviously this discussion could go on for a while.
>
> (I can share my experience with both styles as far as building Struts
> is concerned, but that will just add to the "ant is better" "no maven
> is better" exchange.)
>
> Perhaps an acceptable approach would be to proceed with Maven (since
> this is where the volunteer time is going - a HUGE plus), but retain
> an Ant script that can be used for just building struts jars, for
> people who are just looking to run build the jars (for any reason
> whatsoever - customizing, testing patches, etc). The Ant scripts
> won't need to generate docs or build the website. Just build the jars
> and run some tests. I think such a script could be easier to
> maintain, and its corresponding properties file can be kept relatively
> simple and user-friendly.
>
> This way, we can get the benefits of both worlds. All the benefits
> that Maven brings, and the ease and simplicity of Ant. Well, that'd
> be because both are present. If the Ant script ends up being too
> difficult to maintain, then it can be removed later. In the meantime,
> curious users and potential contributors won't have to be turned away
> by the "intimidating" Maven requirement.
>
> Hubert
>
>
>
>>Joe Germuska wrote:
>>
>>>At 2:53 PM -0500 2/23/05, Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>An unsolicited outside comment...
>>>>
>>>>If your intention is to continue to allow the general Struts user
>>>>community to still be able to build Struts, I would suggest against
>>>>Maven.
>>>>
>>>>Maven strikes me as considerably more complex and intimidating than
>>>>does Ant, even if that complexity might be justifiable because Maven
>>>>is more powerful. I think there is a higher barrier to entry with
>>>>Maven, and Ant is I think a more common and well-understood tool by
>>>>most developers.
>>>>
>>>>If this isn't so much a concern though, i.e., if you intend that for
>>>>the most part only those interested in actively developing Struts
>>>>should be building it from source, than by all means go with Maven.
>>>>
>>>>It would however be unfortunate if the seemingly simple choice of a
>>>>build tool discouraged contributions. I'm not saying this would be
>>>>the case going with Maven, but I *would* be less concerned about this
>>>>with Ant.
>>>
>>>
>>>Have you used Maven? I understand that it has a lot of features
>>>(perhaps too many) and that it can be a bit slow off the mark, but you
>>>never have to modify a single file? I have seen few if any Ant-based
>>>projects which didn't require at least a bit of tweaking to a local
>>>build.properties file; on the other hand, most Maven projects "just
>>>work" if you have Maven installed.
>>>
>>>I agree that we don't want to hamper usage by the general community;
>>>however, I feel that -- specifically with Struts -- we never had a
>>>particularly easy to use Ant build.
>>>
>>>Joe
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
Your right Joe. BAD FRANK!! :)
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
Joe Germuska wrote:
> At 5:39 PM -0500 2/23/05, Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
>
>> As I look through the Getting Started docs on the Maven site, I'm met
>> with some phrases of concern right off the bat:
>
>
> See, Frank... Your problem is that you read the documentation first...
>
> ;-)
>
> Joe
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Joe Germuska <Jo...@Germuska.com>.
At 5:39 PM -0500 2/23/05, Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
>As I look through the Getting Started docs on the Maven site, I'm
>met with some phrases of concern right off the bat:
See, Frank... Your problem is that you read the documentation first...
;-)
Joe
--
Joe Germuska
Joe@Germuska.com
http://blog.germuska.com
"Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
I'll answer that since I'm the one that made the comment in the first
place :) ...
Firstly, let me be clear: I have nothing against Maven, so it's not a
question of liking one thing over another. And I realize I'm not on the
Struts development team anyway so my opinion probably means even *less*
than some others, but I offer it none the less :)
As I look through the Getting Started docs on the Maven site, I'm met
with some phrases of concern right off the bat:
"For those that have already skimmed the documentation on this site, you
may be asking yourself, what *exactly* does it mean to use Maven?"
To which I reply: "If I've skimmed the documentation, why would I have
any doubt as to what using Maven really means? Is it THAT
complicated?!? Shouldn't I have a fairly clear picture at this point?"
Then there's:
"That question will have different answers over time as Maven evolves..."
...Which concerns me because I'm thinking "Gee, does that mean I'm
starting down a path that's going to result in me having to keep up with
something that's just getting MORE complicated?"
Neither of these are big enough to make me think "Oh, forget Maven!",
but they do raise an eyebrow. Again, remember that I'm not talking
about the people that already know Maven... like I said before, it's
just like any other tool: you start out being a bit intimidated
(perhaps), and as you gain experience it becomes no problem and you
wonder why you ever had any problem at all! But for someone coming to
it for the first time, statements like the above might be a bit
disconcerting.
Then you get to the part of the documentation talking about installation
and you have to deal with the concept of a "repository". Sure, you
probably notice the part that says you can skip this step if you have
trouble, but then your back to asking "why should I have any trouble at
such an early stage??" and again your getting a tad more worried.
Then you get it installed and set up (and realize it actually wasn't a
big deal), but now your confronted with the whole "project object model"
idea. Which, again, turns out to not be such a big deal at all, but
it's one more hurdle to jump.
The point I'm trying to make here is in no way disparaging of Maven at
all, and it shouldn't be read as an endorsement of Ant over Maven. What
I am trying to illustrate is that the barrier to entry with Maven
involved is a little bit higher for a beginner than for Ant IMHO, and
that could potentially dissuade some people from contributing to a
project. I don't want to make more of this point than should be made of
it because, ultimately, it's probably a very minor consideration.
In the end, you aren't going to hear any complaints from me regardless
of which is chosen, I was just raising what I thought might be a valid
concern. Certainly if no one agrees with the assessment in the first
place than there's nothing left to debate (and never actually was I
suppose), so Maven it is! :)
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
Joe Germuska wrote:
> At 10:36 PM +0100 2/23/05, Arnaud HERITIER wrote:
>
>> If possible you can generate the ant script with maven so you won't
>> have to manually maintain it (It is already done like that in
>> jakarta commons).
>> If you want, you can commit it on SVN and ant users will able to build
>> jars and run tests.
>
>
> I'm generally opposed to committing any generated files to the SVN
> repository, as it always becomes confusing.
>
> Hubert wrote:
>
>> In the meantime, curious users and
>> > potential contributors won't have to be turned away by the
>> > "intimidating" Maven requirement.
>
>
> This is what I don't understand. Maven just isn't hard to install. You
> download it, you run it. The first time, it takes a while while it
> retrieves a bunch of dependencies. If you're Wendy, you have some
> headaches because of your IT environment ;-) but really, why is it
> intimidating? Just because less books have been written about it than Ant?
>
> I'm fine with people not *liking* Maven -- but I don't know why they
> should be any more afraid of it than of any other third-party executable
> that they could download, Ant included.
>
> Joe
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
RE: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Joe Germuska <Jo...@Germuska.com>.
At 10:36 PM +0100 2/23/05, Arnaud HERITIER wrote:
>If possible you can generate the ant script with maven so you won't
>have to manually maintain it (It is already done like that in
>jakarta commons).
>If you want, you can commit it on SVN and ant users will able to
>build jars and run tests.
I'm generally opposed to committing any generated files to the SVN
repository, as it always becomes confusing.
Hubert wrote:
>In the meantime, curious users and
> > potential contributors won't have to be turned away by the
> > "intimidating" Maven requirement.
This is what I don't understand. Maven just isn't hard to install.
You download it, you run it. The first time, it takes a while while
it retrieves a bunch of dependencies. If you're Wendy, you have some
headaches because of your IT environment ;-) but really, why is it
intimidating? Just because less books have been written about it
than Ant?
I'm fine with people not *liking* Maven -- but I don't know why they
should be any more afraid of it than of any other third-party
executable that they could download, Ant included.
Joe
--
Joe Germuska
Joe@Germuska.com
http://blog.germuska.com
"Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
RE: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Arnaud HERITIER <ah...@gmail.com>.
If possible you can generate the ant script with maven so you won't have to manually maintain it (It is already done like that in
jakarta commons).
If you want, you can commit it on SVN and ant users will able to build jars and run tests.
Arnaud
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Hubert Rabago [mailto:hrabago@gmail.com]
> Envoyé : mercredi 23 février 2005 22:23
> À : Struts Developers List
> Objet : Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
>
> Obviously this discussion could go on for a while.
>
> (I can share my experience with both styles as far as
> building Struts is concerned, but that will just add to the
> "ant is better" "no maven is better" exchange.)
>
> Perhaps an acceptable approach would be to proceed with Maven
> (since this is where the volunteer time is going - a HUGE
> plus), but retain an Ant script that can be used for just
> building struts jars, for people who are just looking to run
> build the jars (for any reason whatsoever - customizing,
> testing patches, etc). The Ant scripts won't need to
> generate docs or build the website. Just build the jars and
> run some tests. I think such a script could be easier to
> maintain, and its corresponding properties file can be kept
> relatively simple and user-friendly.
>
> This way, we can get the benefits of both worlds. All the
> benefits that Maven brings, and the ease and simplicity of
> Ant. Well, that'd be because both are present. If the Ant
> script ends up being too difficult to maintain, then it can
> be removed later. In the meantime, curious users and
> potential contributors won't have to be turned away by the
> "intimidating" Maven requirement.
>
> Hubert
>
>
> > Joe Germuska wrote:
> > > At 2:53 PM -0500 2/23/05, Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
> > >
> > >> An unsolicited outside comment...
> > >>
> > >> If your intention is to continue to allow the general
> Struts user
> > >> community to still be able to build Struts, I would
> suggest against
> > >> Maven.
> > >>
> > >> Maven strikes me as considerably more complex and
> intimidating than
> > >> does Ant, even if that complexity might be justifiable because
> > >> Maven is more powerful. I think there is a higher
> barrier to entry
> > >> with Maven, and Ant is I think a more common and well-understood
> > >> tool by most developers.
> > >>
> > >> If this isn't so much a concern though, i.e., if you intend that
> > >> for the most part only those interested in actively developing
> > >> Struts should be building it from source, than by all
> means go with Maven.
> > >>
> > >> It would however be unfortunate if the seemingly simple
> choice of a
> > >> build tool discouraged contributions. I'm not saying
> this would be
> > >> the case going with Maven, but I *would* be less concerned about
> > >> this with Ant.
> > >
> > >
> > > Have you used Maven? I understand that it has a lot of features
> > > (perhaps too many) and that it can be a bit slow off the
> mark, but
> > > you never have to modify a single file? I have seen few if any
> > > Ant-based projects which didn't require at least a bit of
> tweaking
> > > to a local build.properties file; on the other hand, most Maven
> > > projects "just work" if you have Maven installed.
> > >
> > > I agree that we don't want to hamper usage by the general
> community;
> > > however, I feel that -- specifically with Struts -- we
> never had a
> > > particularly easy to use Ant build.
> > >
> > > Joe
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org For
> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Hubert Rabago <hr...@gmail.com>.
Obviously this discussion could go on for a while.
(I can share my experience with both styles as far as building Struts
is concerned, but that will just add to the "ant is better" "no maven
is better" exchange.)
Perhaps an acceptable approach would be to proceed with Maven (since
this is where the volunteer time is going - a HUGE plus), but retain
an Ant script that can be used for just building struts jars, for
people who are just looking to run build the jars (for any reason
whatsoever - customizing, testing patches, etc). The Ant scripts
won't need to generate docs or build the website. Just build the jars
and run some tests. I think such a script could be easier to
maintain, and its corresponding properties file can be kept relatively
simple and user-friendly.
This way, we can get the benefits of both worlds. All the benefits
that Maven brings, and the ease and simplicity of Ant. Well, that'd
be because both are present. If the Ant script ends up being too
difficult to maintain, then it can be removed later. In the meantime,
curious users and potential contributors won't have to be turned away
by the "intimidating" Maven requirement.
Hubert
> Joe Germuska wrote:
> > At 2:53 PM -0500 2/23/05, Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
> >
> >> An unsolicited outside comment...
> >>
> >> If your intention is to continue to allow the general Struts user
> >> community to still be able to build Struts, I would suggest against
> >> Maven.
> >>
> >> Maven strikes me as considerably more complex and intimidating than
> >> does Ant, even if that complexity might be justifiable because Maven
> >> is more powerful. I think there is a higher barrier to entry with
> >> Maven, and Ant is I think a more common and well-understood tool by
> >> most developers.
> >>
> >> If this isn't so much a concern though, i.e., if you intend that for
> >> the most part only those interested in actively developing Struts
> >> should be building it from source, than by all means go with Maven.
> >>
> >> It would however be unfortunate if the seemingly simple choice of a
> >> build tool discouraged contributions. I'm not saying this would be
> >> the case going with Maven, but I *would* be less concerned about this
> >> with Ant.
> >
> >
> > Have you used Maven? I understand that it has a lot of features
> > (perhaps too many) and that it can be a bit slow off the mark, but you
> > never have to modify a single file? I have seen few if any Ant-based
> > projects which didn't require at least a bit of tweaking to a local
> > build.properties file; on the other hand, most Maven projects "just
> > work" if you have Maven installed.
> >
> > I agree that we don't want to hamper usage by the general community;
> > however, I feel that -- specifically with Struts -- we never had a
> > particularly easy to use Ant build.
> >
> > Joe
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
Look James, I already had to eat my words on Ant with some guys at work
who I originally told I'd *NEVER* use it, so I'm *NOT* gonna do the same
with Maven! :)
Not this week anyway :)
Seriously though, that's cool, I wasn't aware it is (almost) that easy.
Well, I raised the one concern I had, I'm certainly not going to
complain whichever direction you guys go. Can't hurt to consider all
the angles I figure, even if the one I point out isn't a big one.
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
James Mitchell wrote:
> That's great! Now copy that script and paste it into your maven.xml
> between <goal and </goal, and voila!!
>
> Ok! Maybe not THAT easy....but almost!
>
>
>
> --
> James Mitchell
> Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
> EdgeTech, Inc.
> 678.910.8017
> AIM: jmitchtx
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frank W. Zammetti"
> <fz...@omnytex.com>
> To: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 3:48 PM
> Subject: Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
>
>
>> I had to toy with Maven on a project a few weeks back I was asked to
>> look at and resolve some issues with. It felt very much like using
>> CVS to me... Gets the job done, and you know there is a lot of power
>> there, but for a beginner it feels like its fighting you. As with
>> most new tools, familiarity gained over time would ease the difficulty
>> to the point, hopefully, where the power shines through and you forget
>> your initial difficulties.
>>
>> But those initial lumps stay with you a while :)
>>
>> I can't comment at all on the existing Ant builds as I never had cause
>> to compile Struts myself. If the scripts are as you say, then it
>> certainly lessens my argument somewhat :)
>>
>> As an aside, the irony here is that I wasn't thrilled with Ant at
>> first either, but I've kind of taken a liking to it lately. For
>> example, just last week I wrote a script that (1) stopped Tomcat (if
>> running), (2) did some initialization tasks to prepare for the build,
>> (3) updated a build number in an About screen JSP, (4) compiled about
>> 200 source files, (5) compiled about 80 JSPs (to servlet and to class,
>> just for verification purposes), (6) ran about 50 JUnit tests, (7)
>> generated javadocs for the entire code base, (8) WARed the
>> application, (9) deployed it under Tomcat (in exploded format, the WAR
>> was created for manual deployment under Websphere), (10) deployed the
>> javadocs to a documentation server, (11) cleaned up (both the build
>> environment and deleted the Tomcat work folder) and (12) restarted
>> Tomcat. The script to me is easy as hell to follow, doesn't require
>> any outside configuration (you just have to update the build number in
>> the build.xml file itself, which you are reminded about when the
>> script is run) and runs in under 50 seconds on my 2-year old PC. I get
>> output to the console as well as a log file too. Of course it was
>> easy to set up for doing this (just had to add the junit.jar to the
>> Ant folder, nothing else beyond the usual simple setup chores).
>>
>> I was actually doing the same thing with a DOS batch file previously,
>> but now I can run my build under Linux, and its a little easier to
>> follow I think. Call me an Ant convert :)
>>
>> --
>> Frank W. Zammetti
>> Founder and Chief Software Architect
>> Omnytex Technologies
>> http://www.omnytex.com
>>
>> Joe Germuska wrote:
>>
>>> At 2:53 PM -0500 2/23/05, Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
>>>
>>>> An unsolicited outside comment...
>>>>
>>>> If your intention is to continue to allow the general Struts user
>>>> community to still be able to build Struts, I would suggest against
>>>> Maven.
>>>>
>>>> Maven strikes me as considerably more complex and intimidating than
>>>> does Ant, even if that complexity might be justifiable because Maven
>>>> is more powerful. I think there is a higher barrier to entry with
>>>> Maven, and Ant is I think a more common and well-understood tool by
>>>> most developers.
>>>>
>>>> If this isn't so much a concern though, i.e., if you intend that for
>>>> the most part only those interested in actively developing Struts
>>>> should be building it from source, than by all means go with Maven.
>>>>
>>>> It would however be unfortunate if the seemingly simple choice of a
>>>> build tool discouraged contributions. I'm not saying this would be
>>>> the case going with Maven, but I *would* be less concerned about
>>>> this with Ant.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Have you used Maven? I understand that it has a lot of features
>>> (perhaps too many) and that it can be a bit slow off the mark, but
>>> you never have to modify a single file? I have seen few if any
>>> Ant-based projects which didn't require at least a bit of tweaking to
>>> a local build.properties file; on the other hand, most Maven projects
>>> "just work" if you have Maven installed.
>>>
>>> I agree that we don't want to hamper usage by the general community;
>>> however, I feel that -- specifically with Struts -- we never had a
>>> particularly easy to use Ant build.
>>>
>>> Joe
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org>.
That's great! Now copy that script and paste it into your maven.xml between
<goal and </goal, and voila!!
Ok! Maybe not THAT easy....but almost!
--
James Mitchell
Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
EdgeTech, Inc.
678.910.8017
AIM: jmitchtx
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>
To: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 3:48 PM
Subject: Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
>I had to toy with Maven on a project a few weeks back I was asked to look
>at and resolve some issues with. It felt very much like using CVS to me...
>Gets the job done, and you know there is a lot of power there, but for a
>beginner it feels like its fighting you. As with most new tools,
>familiarity gained over time would ease the difficulty to the point,
>hopefully, where the power shines through and you forget your initial
>difficulties.
>
> But those initial lumps stay with you a while :)
>
> I can't comment at all on the existing Ant builds as I never had cause to
> compile Struts myself. If the scripts are as you say, then it certainly
> lessens my argument somewhat :)
>
> As an aside, the irony here is that I wasn't thrilled with Ant at first
> either, but I've kind of taken a liking to it lately. For example, just
> last week I wrote a script that (1) stopped Tomcat (if running), (2) did
> some initialization tasks to prepare for the build, (3) updated a build
> number in an About screen JSP, (4) compiled about 200 source files, (5)
> compiled about 80 JSPs (to servlet and to class, just for verification
> purposes), (6) ran about 50 JUnit tests, (7) generated javadocs for the
> entire code base, (8) WARed the application, (9) deployed it under Tomcat
> (in exploded format, the WAR was created for manual deployment under
> Websphere), (10) deployed the javadocs to a documentation server, (11)
> cleaned up (both the build environment and deleted the Tomcat work folder)
> and (12) restarted Tomcat. The script to me is easy as hell to follow,
> doesn't require any outside configuration (you just have to update the
> build number in the build.xml file itself, which you are reminded about
> when the script is run) and runs in under 50 seconds on my 2-year old PC.
> I get output to the console as well as a log file too. Of course it was
> easy to set up for doing this (just had to add the junit.jar to the Ant
> folder, nothing else beyond the usual simple setup chores).
>
> I was actually doing the same thing with a DOS batch file previously, but
> now I can run my build under Linux, and its a little easier to follow I
> think. Call me an Ant convert :)
>
> --
> Frank W. Zammetti
> Founder and Chief Software Architect
> Omnytex Technologies
> http://www.omnytex.com
>
> Joe Germuska wrote:
>> At 2:53 PM -0500 2/23/05, Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
>>
>>> An unsolicited outside comment...
>>>
>>> If your intention is to continue to allow the general Struts user
>>> community to still be able to build Struts, I would suggest against
>>> Maven.
>>>
>>> Maven strikes me as considerably more complex and intimidating than does
>>> Ant, even if that complexity might be justifiable because Maven is more
>>> powerful. I think there is a higher barrier to entry with Maven, and
>>> Ant is I think a more common and well-understood tool by most
>>> developers.
>>>
>>> If this isn't so much a concern though, i.e., if you intend that for the
>>> most part only those interested in actively developing Struts should be
>>> building it from source, than by all means go with Maven.
>>>
>>> It would however be unfortunate if the seemingly simple choice of a
>>> build tool discouraged contributions. I'm not saying this would be the
>>> case going with Maven, but I *would* be less concerned about this with
>>> Ant.
>>
>>
>> Have you used Maven? I understand that it has a lot of features (perhaps
>> too many) and that it can be a bit slow off the mark, but you never have
>> to modify a single file? I have seen few if any Ant-based projects which
>> didn't require at least a bit of tweaking to a local build.properties
>> file; on the other hand, most Maven projects "just work" if you have
>> Maven installed.
>>
>> I agree that we don't want to hamper usage by the general community;
>> however, I feel that -- specifically with Struts -- we never had a
>> particularly easy to use Ant build.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
I had to toy with Maven on a project a few weeks back I was asked to
look at and resolve some issues with. It felt very much like using CVS
to me... Gets the job done, and you know there is a lot of power there,
but for a beginner it feels like its fighting you. As with most new
tools, familiarity gained over time would ease the difficulty to the
point, hopefully, where the power shines through and you forget your
initial difficulties.
But those initial lumps stay with you a while :)
I can't comment at all on the existing Ant builds as I never had cause
to compile Struts myself. If the scripts are as you say, then it
certainly lessens my argument somewhat :)
As an aside, the irony here is that I wasn't thrilled with Ant at first
either, but I've kind of taken a liking to it lately. For example, just
last week I wrote a script that (1) stopped Tomcat (if running), (2) did
some initialization tasks to prepare for the build, (3) updated a build
number in an About screen JSP, (4) compiled about 200 source files, (5)
compiled about 80 JSPs (to servlet and to class, just for verification
purposes), (6) ran about 50 JUnit tests, (7) generated javadocs for the
entire code base, (8) WARed the application, (9) deployed it under
Tomcat (in exploded format, the WAR was created for manual deployment
under Websphere), (10) deployed the javadocs to a documentation server,
(11) cleaned up (both the build environment and deleted the Tomcat work
folder) and (12) restarted Tomcat. The script to me is easy as hell to
follow, doesn't require any outside configuration (you just have to
update the build number in the build.xml file itself, which you are
reminded about when the script is run) and runs in under 50 seconds on
my 2-year old PC. I get output to the console as well as a log file
too. Of course it was easy to set up for doing this (just had to add
the junit.jar to the Ant folder, nothing else beyond the usual simple
setup chores).
I was actually doing the same thing with a DOS batch file previously,
but now I can run my build under Linux, and its a little easier to
follow I think. Call me an Ant convert :)
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
Joe Germuska wrote:
> At 2:53 PM -0500 2/23/05, Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
>
>> An unsolicited outside comment...
>>
>> If your intention is to continue to allow the general Struts user
>> community to still be able to build Struts, I would suggest against
>> Maven.
>>
>> Maven strikes me as considerably more complex and intimidating than
>> does Ant, even if that complexity might be justifiable because Maven
>> is more powerful. I think there is a higher barrier to entry with
>> Maven, and Ant is I think a more common and well-understood tool by
>> most developers.
>>
>> If this isn't so much a concern though, i.e., if you intend that for
>> the most part only those interested in actively developing Struts
>> should be building it from source, than by all means go with Maven.
>>
>> It would however be unfortunate if the seemingly simple choice of a
>> build tool discouraged contributions. I'm not saying this would be
>> the case going with Maven, but I *would* be less concerned about this
>> with Ant.
>
>
> Have you used Maven? I understand that it has a lot of features
> (perhaps too many) and that it can be a bit slow off the mark, but you
> never have to modify a single file? I have seen few if any Ant-based
> projects which didn't require at least a bit of tweaking to a local
> build.properties file; on the other hand, most Maven projects "just
> work" if you have Maven installed.
>
> I agree that we don't want to hamper usage by the general community;
> however, I feel that -- specifically with Struts -- we never had a
> particularly easy to use Ant build.
>
> Joe
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org>.
http://maven.apache.org/reference/user-guide.html
....look for "maven.home.local"
--
James Mitchell
Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
EdgeTech, Inc.
678.910.8017
AIM: jmitchtx
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wendy Smoak" <ja...@wendysmoak.com>
To: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 3:54 PM
Subject: Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
>
> My Maven gripe is that on Windows it wants to put all the .jars under
> C:\Documents and Settings\...
>
> (It's a problem at work due to the roaming profiles that want to
> synchronize
> everything in there with the server.) I think someone once told me how to
> make Maven put the files elsewhere, and I promptly forgot and wandered off
> to do something else.
>
> One more time, and I'll try to pay attention this time? Is there a file I
> can edit to tell Maven where its local repository should be?
>
> Thanks,
> Wendy Smoak
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Wendy Smoak <ja...@wendysmoak.com>.
My Maven gripe is that on Windows it wants to put all the .jars under
C:\Documents and Settings\...
(It's a problem at work due to the roaming profiles that want to synchronize
everything in there with the server.) I think someone once told me how to
make Maven put the files elsewhere, and I promptly forgot and wandered off
to do something else.
One more time, and I'll try to pay attention this time? Is there a file I
can edit to tell Maven where its local repository should be?
Thanks,
Wendy Smoak
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Nathan Bubna <nb...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 14:05:12 -0600, Joe Germuska <Jo...@germuska.com> wrote:
> At 2:53 PM -0500 2/23/05, Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
> >An unsolicited outside comment...
> >
> >If your intention is to continue to allow the general Struts user
> >community to still be able to build Struts, I would suggest against
> >Maven.
> >
> >Maven strikes me as considerably more complex and intimidating than
> >does Ant, even if that complexity might be justifiable because Maven
> >is more powerful. I think there is a higher barrier to entry with
> >Maven, and Ant is I think a more common and well-understood tool by
> >most developers.
> >
> >If this isn't so much a concern though, i.e., if you intend that for
> >the most part only those interested in actively developing Struts
> >should be building it from source, than by all means go with Maven.
> >
> >It would however be unfortunate if the seemingly simple choice of a
> >build tool discouraged contributions. I'm not saying this would be
> >the case going with Maven, but I *would* be less concerned about
> >this with Ant.
>
> Have you used Maven? I understand that it has a lot of features
> (perhaps too many) and that it can be a bit slow off the mark, but
> you never have to modify a single file? I have seen few if any
> Ant-based projects which didn't require at least a bit of tweaking to
> a local build.properties file; on the other hand, most Maven projects
> "just work" if you have Maven installed.
>
> I agree that we don't want to hamper usage by the general community;
> however, I feel that -- specifically with Struts -- we never had a
> particularly easy to use Ant build.
agreed. i remember the first time i tried to get struts building
locally. it was a pain to get all the dependencies set up, even
though i was familiar with ant. maven may still be unfamiliar to many
developers (myself included), but that alone is a poor reason to not
use it. once upon a time, ant was unfamiliar to me too. :)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Joe Germuska <Jo...@Germuska.com>.
At 2:53 PM -0500 2/23/05, Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
>An unsolicited outside comment...
>
>If your intention is to continue to allow the general Struts user
>community to still be able to build Struts, I would suggest against
>Maven.
>
>Maven strikes me as considerably more complex and intimidating than
>does Ant, even if that complexity might be justifiable because Maven
>is more powerful. I think there is a higher barrier to entry with
>Maven, and Ant is I think a more common and well-understood tool by
>most developers.
>
>If this isn't so much a concern though, i.e., if you intend that for
>the most part only those interested in actively developing Struts
>should be building it from source, than by all means go with Maven.
>
>It would however be unfortunate if the seemingly simple choice of a
>build tool discouraged contributions. I'm not saying this would be
>the case going with Maven, but I *would* be less concerned about
>this with Ant.
Have you used Maven? I understand that it has a lot of features
(perhaps too many) and that it can be a bit slow off the mark, but
you never have to modify a single file? I have seen few if any
Ant-based projects which didn't require at least a bit of tweaking to
a local build.properties file; on the other hand, most Maven projects
"just work" if you have Maven installed.
I agree that we don't want to hamper usage by the general community;
however, I feel that -- specifically with Struts -- we never had a
particularly easy to use Ant build.
Joe
--
Joe Germuska
Joe@Germuska.com
http://blog.germuska.com
"Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
An unsolicited outside comment...
If your intention is to continue to allow the general Struts user
community to still be able to build Struts, I would suggest against Maven.
Maven strikes me as considerably more complex and intimidating than does
Ant, even if that complexity might be justifiable because Maven is more
powerful. I think there is a higher barrier to entry with Maven, and
Ant is I think a more common and well-understood tool by most developers.
If this isn't so much a concern though, i.e., if you intend that for the
most part only those interested in actively developing Struts should be
building it from source, than by all means go with Maven.
It would however be unfortunate if the seemingly simple choice of a
build tool discouraged contributions. I'm not saying this would be the
case going with Maven, but I *would* be less concerned about this with Ant.
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
Joe Germuska wrote:
> At 10:51 AM -0800 2/23/05, Don Brown wrote:
>
>> While I generally agree with letting a project's direction be guided
>> by those that are willing to do the work, in this case, I think we do
>> need to come to a consensus on a single build tool and work to get rid
>> of the other. Since you are well versed in Maven and are willing to
>> do the work as evidenced by recent commits, let's all agree to make
>> Maven the official Struts build tool and not even bother with Ant. I
>> have complete faith in your ability to ensure 100% functionality with
>> Maven.
>>
>> I should also add, if you need any help in an area, let me know.
>
>
> I'm +1 to Maven.
>
> Joe
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Joe Germuska <Jo...@Germuska.com>.
At 10:51 AM -0800 2/23/05, Don Brown wrote:
>While I generally agree with letting a project's direction be guided
>by those that are willing to do the work, in this case, I think we
>do need to come to a consensus on a single build tool and work to
>get rid of the other. Since you are well versed in Maven and are
>willing to do the work as evidenced by recent commits, let's all
>agree to make Maven the official Struts build tool and not even
>bother with Ant. I have complete faith in your ability to ensure
>100% functionality with Maven.
>
>I should also add, if you need any help in an area, let me know.
I'm +1 to Maven.
Joe
--
Joe Germuska
Joe@Germuska.com
http://blog.germuska.com
"Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org>.
Thank you.
Maven has a cool feature whereby you can generate an Ant build.xml file
based on a current Mavenized project. This is done in several commons
projects. However, we are not exactly using Maven in a way that would
support such an effort.
The biggest issue I'm pondering over now is how to get the docs to tie
together. If you look at the way Maven does it, each plugin has it's own
set of docs that don't link back to the parent. Not sure I like that, but
I'll have to dig a bit deeper and see if we can come up with something
better.
--
James Mitchell
Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
EdgeTech, Inc.
678.910.8017
AIM: jmitchtx
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Brown" <mr...@twdata.org>
To: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 1:51 PM
Subject: Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
> While I generally agree with letting a project's direction be guided by
> those that are willing to do the work, in this case, I think we do need to
> come to a consensus on a single build tool and work to get rid of the
> other. Since you are well versed in Maven and are willing to do the work
> as evidenced by recent commits, let's all agree to make Maven the official
> Struts build tool and not even bother with Ant. I have complete faith in
> your ability to ensure 100% functionality with Maven.
>
> I should also add, if you need any help in an area, let me know.
>
> Don
>
> James Mitchell wrote:
>> It has nothing to do with holding a vote. It has more to do with who
>> does the work.
>>
>> I (personally) have invested many an hour getting up to speed with Maven,
>> so I will continue to work on the Maven build. I have also promised to
>> put together an Ant version that does the same thing, and I still intend
>> to deliver. However, this is all a slow process (as I find bits of time
>> throughout my day). So please just be patient, we will have things back
>> in place before you know it.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> James Mitchell
>> Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
>> EdgeTech, Inc.
>> 678.910.8017
>> AIM: jmitchtx
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vic" <vi...@friendvu.com>
>> To: <de...@struts.apache.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 9:34 AM
>> Subject: Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
>>
>>
>>> That's kind of the idea. Pick 1! Just vote.
>>> (I persoanly like Ant, it can do same things, but having one is better,
>>> not 2)
>>> .V
>>>
>>> Martin Cooper wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> In any case, +1 for picking one and getting on with it. ;-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Forums, Boards, Blogs and News in RiA <http://www.boardVU.com>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org>.
Yes, and we already have. But that needs to be cleaned up just anything
else.
--
James Mitchell
Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
EdgeTech, Inc.
678.910.8017
AIM: jmitchtx
----- Original Message -----
From: "Arnaud HERITIER" <ah...@gmail.com>
To: "'Struts Developers List'" <de...@struts.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 5:40 PM
Subject: RE: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
>>
>> For the time being, we have to "bother" with Ant, because,
>> AFAIK, it's the only way we have to build the website right now.
>
> Can't you include it in a maven goal (in maven.xml)?
>
> Arnaud
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
RE: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Arnaud HERITIER <ah...@gmail.com>.
>
> For the time being, we have to "bother" with Ant, because,
> AFAIK, it's the only way we have to build the website right now.
Can't you include it in a maven goal (in maven.xml)?
Arnaud
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Ted Husted <hu...@apache.org>.
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:51:59 -0800, Don Brown wrote:
> While I generally agree with letting a project's direction be
> guided by those that are willing to do the work, in this case, I
> think we do need to come to a consensus on a single build tool and
> work to get rid of the other.
> Since you are well versed in Maven
> and are willing to do the work as evidenced by recent commits,
> let's all agree to make Maven the official Struts build tool and
> not even bother with Ant. I have complete faith in your ability to
> ensure 100% functionality with Maven.
>
> I should also add, if you need any help in an area, let me know.
>
> Don
For the time being, we have to "bother" with Ant, because, AFAIK, it's the only way we have to build the website right now.
Once there is a working Maven build, I'm sure we will be happy to scrap the remaining Ant buildfiles. Me probably most of all. After five long years of maintaining Ant property files, I'm very happy to let Maven maintain a repository for me :)
But, I do want to remind everyone that we do all have the right to revolution. If someone ever wants to experiment with Ant again, it's their right to do so. Just as it was our right to start experimenting with Maven last year.
I also want to point out that it's physically impossible for anyone but those who are willing to do the work to guide a project's direction. We can post messages until doomsday, but that's not going to get us a working build. The one and only thing that will get us a Maven build is volunteers doing the work.
After all, if someone committed a fully-functional Ant build tomorrow, what could we do about it? Could we veto it? We all have the right to veto a product change, but only if we are able to provide a viable alternative. In this hypothetical, that would be a working Maven build. So, no, we couldn't veto it. Until someone could commit a working Maven build, as James is close to doing, we'd have to retain the solution that worked.
When we say things like "them that does the work makes the decisions", we aren't stating policy. We're recognizing reality. :)
-Ted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Don Brown <mr...@twdata.org>.
While I generally agree with letting a project's direction be guided by
those that are willing to do the work, in this case, I think we do need
to come to a consensus on a single build tool and work to get rid of the
other. Since you are well versed in Maven and are willing to do the
work as evidenced by recent commits, let's all agree to make Maven the
official Struts build tool and not even bother with Ant. I have
complete faith in your ability to ensure 100% functionality with Maven.
I should also add, if you need any help in an area, let me know.
Don
James Mitchell wrote:
> It has nothing to do with holding a vote. It has more to do with who
> does the work.
>
> I (personally) have invested many an hour getting up to speed with
> Maven, so I will continue to work on the Maven build. I have also
> promised to put together an Ant version that does the same thing, and I
> still intend to deliver. However, this is all a slow process (as I find
> bits of time throughout my day). So please just be patient, we will
> have things back in place before you know it.
>
>
>
>
> --
> James Mitchell
> Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
> EdgeTech, Inc.
> 678.910.8017
> AIM: jmitchtx
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vic" <vi...@friendvu.com>
> To: <de...@struts.apache.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 9:34 AM
> Subject: Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
>
>
>> That's kind of the idea. Pick 1! Just vote.
>> (I persoanly like Ant, it can do same things, but having one is
>> better, not 2)
>> .V
>>
>> Martin Cooper wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> In any case, +1 for picking one and getting on with it. ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Forums, Boards, Blogs and News in RiA <http://www.boardVU.com>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org>.
It has nothing to do with holding a vote. It has more to do with who does
the work.
I (personally) have invested many an hour getting up to speed with Maven, so
I will continue to work on the Maven build. I have also promised to put
together an Ant version that does the same thing, and I still intend to
deliver. However, this is all a slow process (as I find bits of time
throughout my day). So please just be patient, we will have things back in
place before you know it.
--
James Mitchell
Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
EdgeTech, Inc.
678.910.8017
AIM: jmitchtx
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vic" <vi...@friendvu.com>
To: <de...@struts.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 9:34 AM
Subject: Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
> That's kind of the idea. Pick 1! Just vote.
> (I persoanly like Ant, it can do same things, but having one is better,
> not 2)
> .V
>
> Martin Cooper wrote:
>
>>
>>In any case, +1 for picking one and getting on with it. ;-)
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Forums, Boards, Blogs and News in RiA <http://www.boardVU.com>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Vic <vi...@friendvu.com>.
That's kind of the idea. Pick 1! Just vote.
(I persoanly like Ant, it can do same things, but having one is better,
not 2)
.V
Martin Cooper wrote:
>
>In any case, +1 for picking one and getting on with it. ;-)
>
>
>
--
Forums, Boards, Blogs and News in RiA <http://www.boardVU.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 17:09:31 -0800, Don Brown <mr...@twdata.org> wrote:
> Sorry to raise this controversial subject, but I feel our build
> situation is getting a little out of control. We have maven and ant
> build files scattered throughout our repository, making it very
> confusing to determine which is "official" and which is "experimental".
The act of breaking up the original repo into subprojects started us
down this track, I think. We perhaps should have thought through the
overall build system more fully when we started to do that, but that's
water under the bridge now. In any event, the Ant builds got broken so
that neither worked completely.
> Even our documentation is fragemented with /doc and /xdoc directories
> containing unsynchronized, mostly identical content.
I'm not sure why we ever kept the xdocs stuff, since it was never
going to stay in sync. IMO, we should have zapped it some time ago. At
this point, I think the one reason for keeping it around is as a
reference if we're going to migrate again. I'd be fine with moving it
somewhere else - or even just keeping a copy on minotaur under my
account, which might be as good as anything.
> I think we need to just pick one and get rid of the other. I know for
> some this is like deciding the meaning of life, but I think we need to
> just pick one and remove the other or at least move it to an unsupported
> sandbox area. Struts may currently be in a state where it wants to try
> different ideas and see which ones "win", but the build environment
> should "just work" and require little to no attention.
Agreed. However, when you have a half-baked Maven build and a broken
Ant build, it's not going to "just work" without some work. ;-)
> Personally, I very much perfer Ant and find Maven slow, buggy, and
> overextended, however, it seems those that have been volunteering on the
> build lately perfer Maven, so I vote we go with Maven, convert all the
> docs to xdocs, and clean the Ant-related files out completely.
As I mentioned in another thread recently, I started working on an Ant
build system, but at pretty much the same time, a couple of folks
jumped back into the languishing Maven experiment, so I put my Ant
work on hold (not that it had got all that far, other than what I'd
done for my day job) and jumped into the Maven fray myself.
At this point, I don't know which one is ahead. Ant is closer on site
/ docs, but Maven is probably closer on an all-Struts build. If people
would prefer Ant, I'm quite willing to pick up where I left off with
that. I'm also happy to work on the Maven build, although I don't know
if James M has got far enough with the shared build stuff for other
people to work on it simultaneously. I'm not all that thrilled at the
prospect of working on both, though.
The site / docs is something I do want to work on, and I've said as
much to James off-list more than once recently. One of the sticking
points with Maven is going to be how we deal with generating the TLDs,
which likely won't work from Maven xdocs. This is on my to-do list,
right after writing up a plan for site creation (which is at the top
of my list).
> Of course, I am willing to do whatever it takes to get this
> accomplished. Let's get this, in my opinion, very boring and
> unnecessarily confusing matter resolved so we can get back to the fun
> stuff that is 1.3 and beyond.
I agree that we should get this finished up and working. I haven't had
as much time to put into this as I'd have liked recently, and am not
in a good position at the moment to "plan" the time I can devote, so
it will be "as it happens", so to speak.
In any case, +1 for picking one and getting on with it. ;-)
--
Martin Cooper
> Don
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Ant or Maven (Pick one please)
Posted by Ted Husted <hu...@apache.org>.
Once we get past automatically generating the TLD's, I would venture that Maven's going to be the easiest solution in the long term.
A major element of the build is acquiring the 20+ JARs we are going to need. I know we could get Ant to fetch those from someplace and tuck them somewhere, but it just seems wrong to reinvent that wheel.
Aside form the TLDs, most of the current documentation will need to be sliced and diced for the new packaging. The additional changes we would need to make for Maven would be lost in the rounding.
As Martin mentioned, we can just pull the concept-test xdocs directory out of the core, if that's confusing people.
BUT, until we are ready to build the site with Maven, we should keep an Ant build file around to do that from the legacy XML docs. It's not an optimum solution, but the harsh reality is that we have do what we can on a time-available basis. Of course, it would be nice if someone could take a week off and finish this up in a fell swoop (in any way they deem fit), but, with competing priorities, I don't think any of us can block out that kind of time.
-Ted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org