You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@excalibur.apache.org by Shash Chatterjee <sh...@badfw.org> on 2005/03/21 02:11:34 UTC
Excalibur dependencies
Hi guys!
Mike Nash and I have been trudging through Keel's dependencies in an
effort to Mavenize Keel's build system.
While doing that, it appears that we could stand some cleaning up of
releases and versions, and do some cleanup on the four repos or so that
have various versions of Excalibur stuff. I am willing to go through
and put some effort in for this as and when I find time, but maybe a
plan of *what* we should get done would be the best thing to formulate
first.
Here are some of the things, feel free to add/delete :
- HTTP client on instrumentation is great, plus removes the dependency
on AltRMI, which was never released as far as I can find. Can we get
this released?
- Should we have a release (and keep a list of the versions of) all the
various components based on Framework-4.1.5? Since one can hardly have
two versions of framework in the same app., it'd be very handy to have a
list of the latest versions of the Excalibur components compatible
with 4.1.5, without having to trudge through individual POMs. I'll
work on this ASAP, unless somebody already has this.
- There seems to be a Framework 4.2.0 floating out there, as well as
4.3-dev. What should the next batch of Excalibur component releases be
compatible with?
- In the repos, there is an excalibur-pool-2.0 and an
excalibur-pool-2.0.0. The first one is based on fw 4.1.5, the second on
4.2.0....very confusing.
- Fortress-1.0 is at ibiblio, but not 1.1, and no snapshots of 1.2
anywhere. Should we get some snapshot JARs published, since it is very
stable as is? I have heard several people wanting a release of
Fortress-1.2, what is stopping this (other than effort)? If effort,
what is the list of things to be done?
- We have repos at: ibiblio, two on www.apache.org
(/dist/java-repository and /dist/excalibur), one at planetmirror and a
development one on svn.apache.org. The development one is understood to
have the bleeding edge stuff Why do we need to have all the other ones,
and especially have a generally different combo of various versions in
each repo. Can we clean this up?
Once we get this list fleshed out better, we can enter some JIRA items
for cleanup, and I'd be happy to take on any/all.
Shash
Re: Excalibur dependencies
Posted by J Aaron Farr <ja...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 10:11:15 -0600, Sasvata (Shash) Chatterjee
<sh...@badfw.org> wrote:
> >I'd like to see the 1.2 release out by the end of May at least.
> >
> Let's get the list defined. I can start working on it right away, and
> based on who else can support the efforts, we can see where we come out.
Sounds good. Can you publish the list of what needs release in
conjunction with Fortress 1.2? Alternatively you could also make the
list a JIRA issue under Excalibur Fortress.
> Although more documentation is always nice, do we need to hold up a
> release for that?
> If we have less documentation than we had for Fortress-1.1, then
> certainly, that would be a reason to hold the release.
Perhaps not hold up the release completely, but we cannot ignore the
lack of tutorials and documentation. Initially I want to do a couple
quick "getting started" tutorials in the wiki for Fortress 1.2.
> The binary "platform" is a good thing to get people up and running.
> What are the plans for the platform in terms of what it needs to do?
There isn't a feature list yet. Basically it's just a zip/tar that
someone can download that includes all the other jars necessary for
getting started and a simple hello world app. If there are more
feature requests, we should get them into JIRA. I already have the
initial code for the platform distro in svn.
> I would love to see Eclipse .classpath/.projects included in SVN and
> maybe even in src distributions.
I'm using Eclipse more now myself and I'd like to make the build more
Eclipse friendly. Preferrably, I'd like it if the eclipse .project
and .classpath files could be created via the maven plugin. We'd need
to adjust how some of the projects pick up the root project.xml.
> That's always a plus. Do you mean that Fortress lists dependencies
> unnecessarily (i.e. those are listed in the POM, but not referenced in
> code)?
> Or, that we could make some simple changes to eliminate some
> dependencies we really have? If changes, I'd say, let's get 1.2 out and
> do the code changes later.
I think we should be able to make more of them optional.
What does everyone else think about requirements for a 1.2 release?
--
jaaron
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@excalibur.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@excalibur.apache.org
Re: Excalibur dependencies
Posted by "Sasvata (Shash) Chatterjee" <sh...@badfw.org>.
Aaron,
>In the grand scheme of things I'm thinking about two major releases we
>should be working on: a Fortress 1.2 release that includes releases of
>related Excalibur components and a Fortress 2.0 release that would be
>more "revolutionary".
>
>
>
+1
>I'd like to see the 1.2 release out by the end of May at least.
>
Let's get the list defined. I can start working on it right away, and
based on who else can support the efforts, we can see where we come out.
>If we
>get more people working on it, it could be out sooner (sometime in
>April). Major blockers for me are documentation and a binary
>"platform" distribution.
>
Although more documentation is always nice, do we need to hold up a
release for that?
If we have less documentation than we had for Fortress-1.1, then
certainly, that would be a reason to hold the release.
The binary "platform" is a good thing to get people up and running.
What are the plans for the platform in terms of what it needs to do?
>I'd also like to see more tool support
>(Maven and Eclipse plugins) but I'm not sure if we'll get that out
>right away.
>
I would love to see Eclipse .classpath/.projects included in SVN and
maybe even in src distributions.
I had brought this up earlier, but there were some objections. But I
noticed that setup files for Idea are included,
no need for us Eclipse users to be second-class citizens (I say that
tongue in cheek, even knowing how Idea-users view Eclipse-users :-)).
I tried a "maven -Dgoal=eclipse multiproject:goal", and it would work as
an alternative, if it were not for some top-level directories having
a project.xml, and the eclipse plugin generating .projects for those,
which messes up a simple import from the top-level directory.
Right now, though, it takes way longer to setup Excalibur in Eclipse
than it should....the first experience could be improved a lot.
>Oh, and I'd like to simpify Fortress's dependency list.
>It's like 20 jars right now.
>
>
>
That's always a plus. Do you mean that Fortress lists dependencies
unnecessarily (i.e. those are listed in the POM, but not referenced in
code)?
Or, that we could make some simple changes to eliminate some
dependencies we really have? If changes, I'd say, let's get 1.2 out and
do the
code changes later.
Shash
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@excalibur.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@excalibur.apache.org
Re: Excalibur dependencies
Posted by J Aaron Farr <ja...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 22:35:35 -0500, J Aaron Farr <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > - Fortress-1.0 is at ibiblio, but not 1.1, and no snapshots of 1.2
> > anywhere. Should we get some snapshot JARs published, since it is very
> > stable as is? I have heard several people wanting a release of
> > Fortress-1.2, what is stopping this (other than effort)? If effort, what is
> > the list of things to be done?
>
> I'll start working on a list tomorrow.
I'm starting to add items to JIRA. That would be the best place to
keep this info.
In the grand scheme of things I'm thinking about two major releases we
should be working on: a Fortress 1.2 release that includes releases of
related Excalibur components and a Fortress 2.0 release that would be
more "revolutionary".
I'd like to see the 1.2 release out by the end of May at least. If we
get more people working on it, it could be out sooner (sometime in
April). Major blockers for me are documentation and a binary
"platform" distribution. I'd also like to see more tool support
(Maven and Eclipse plugins) but I'm not sure if we'll get that out
right away. Oh, and I'd like to simpify Fortress's dependency list.
It's like 20 jars right now.
Ultimately, I'd like to get Excalibur to the point that we're doing
solid releases every 3 to 4 months.
--
jaaron
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@excalibur.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@excalibur.apache.org
RE: Excalibur dependencies
Posted by Eric Pugh <ep...@opensourceconnections.com>.
I saw something about putting eclipse files in CVS.. I personally don't
like it because if the project is mavenized, I'd rather drive it using
the Eclipse plugin and maven... It clutters things up and then you
imply only support for Eclipse, versus intellj etc...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@excalibur.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@excalibur.apache.org
Re: Excalibur dependencies
Posted by "Sasvata (Shash) Chatterjee" <sh...@badfw.org>.
Aaron,
>How's that effort going?
>
>
>
So far so good. Right now we are trying to get the dependencies to the
minimal list we can, but overall the build-system is functioning. That,
and Keel can be distributed with so many comm. options, and supports a
lot of UI frameworks, we haven't finished testing with all of them.
>We should also look into drumming up support for getting AltRMI out of
>the Incubator. If it isn't going to graduate, it could at least come
>back here.
>
>
>
I haven't followed AltRMI incubaion. Is it being maintained there? Why
isn't it going to graduate?
> Perhaps we should look into gathering together an all out release of
>
>"Excalibur" including Fortress 1.2.
>
>
>
I think this would be a great idea, and would have a known working set
for FW 4.1.5.
>Indeed. Suggestions for resolution?
>
>
>
I would first delete the 2.0.0 version from the repos, rename it to
2.0.1/2.1 as appropriate. I'm not sure if 2.0.0 was released or not, if
it was we should re-release with the new version number.
> I'll start working on a list tomorrow.
>
>
>
OK thanks. We have "arrived" at a list for Keel, it'd be great to get
it cross-checked.
>There was some talk about this on the repository list a while back.
>We should merge our jar repository with teh
>www.apache.org/dist/java-repository one since that is then mirrored to
>ibiblio.
>
>
That sounds like a plan. But the other repos have some combinations of
Excalibur stuff, but all different combos. Once we consolidate
/dist/java-repository and ibiblio, can we get the same stuff on the
pther ones, or maybe delete stuff from the other ones to reduce
confusion? Also, we need to mention the "suggested" repo list on our
website (we can now get it from getting the source and looking in
project.properties).
>
>
>> Once we get this list fleshed out better, we can enter some JIRA items for
>>cleanup, and I'd be happy to take on any/all.
>>
>>
>
>Definitely need this in JIRA.
>
>
>
I see the stuff you are adding...thanks.
>Got any time frame in mind for any of this?
>
>
>
I can work at it a bit at a time starting now. The end date will depend
on what we have in mind.
Shash
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@excalibur.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@excalibur.apache.org
Re: Excalibur dependencies
Posted by J Aaron Farr <ja...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 19:11:34 -0600, Shash Chatterjee <sh...@badfw.org> wrote:
> Hi guys!
>
> Mike Nash and I have been trudging through Keel's dependencies in an effort
> to Mavenize Keel's build system.
How's that effort going?
> - HTTP client on instrumentation is great, plus removes the dependency on
> AltRMI, which was never released as far as I can find. Can we get this
> released?
+1
We should also look into drumming up support for getting AltRMI out of
the Incubator. If it isn't going to graduate, it could at least come
back here.
> - Should we have a release (and keep a list of the versions of) all the
> various components based on Framework-4.1.5? Since one can hardly have two
> versions of framework in the same app., it'd be very handy to have a list of
> the latest versions of the Excalibur components compatible with 4.1.5,
> without having to trudge through individual POMs. I'll work on this ASAP,
> unless somebody already has this.
Perhaps we should look into gathering together an all out release of
"Excalibur" including Fortress 1.2.
> - In the repos, there is an excalibur-pool-2.0 and an
> excalibur-pool-2.0.0. The first one is based on fw 4.1.5, the second on
> 4.2.0....very confusing.
Indeed. Suggestions for resolution?
> - Fortress-1.0 is at ibiblio, but not 1.1, and no snapshots of 1.2
> anywhere. Should we get some snapshot JARs published, since it is very
> stable as is? I have heard several people wanting a release of
> Fortress-1.2, what is stopping this (other than effort)? If effort, what is
> the list of things to be done?
I'll start working on a list tomorrow.
> - We have repos at: ibiblio, two on www.apache.org (/dist/java-repository
> and /dist/excalibur), one at planetmirror and a development one on
> svn.apache.org. The development one is understood to have the bleeding edge
> stuff Why do we need to have all the other ones, and especially have a
> generally different combo of various versions in each repo. Can we clean
> this up?
There was some talk about this on the repository list a while back.
We should merge our jar repository with teh
www.apache.org/dist/java-repository one since that is then mirrored to
ibiblio.
> Once we get this list fleshed out better, we can enter some JIRA items for
> cleanup, and I'd be happy to take on any/all.
Definitely need this in JIRA.
Got any time frame in mind for any of this?
--
jaaron
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@excalibur.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@excalibur.apache.org