You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Sachin Patel <sp...@gmail.com> on 2005/08/29 15:34:18 UTC
progress on mavenizing eclipse plugins
So after sitting down yesterday and doing a little reading... I have a
much better understanding of Maven. :) I've decided to go with using M2,
one of the reasons which I'm probably going to end up having to write a
plugin and want to avoid massive jelly scripts. :)
M1 provided a convenient jar override feature where I could the specify
the explicit path to dependencies outside of the repo. This makes
things easier as I can just point to the
${eclipse-home}/plugins/blah.jar. Unfortunately M2 doesn't have this.
So after talking to some of the very helpful Maven folks, the only
current way to do this is to have the eclipse jars inside the local
repo. To make it even more painful, from looks of things I don't think
I can just can't download an eclipse image, and do a "select-all" and
copy in the all jars. It looks like I'm going to have to create the
"maven convention" path for each jar.
So from an Eclipse install, for each plugin I would need to copy and
rename the jar from
${eclipse-install}/eclipse/plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources_3.1.0.jar
to...
${local_repo}/eclipse-plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources/3.1.0/org.eclipse.core.resources-3.1.0.jar
I'm still having issues though as even when I try to build offline it is
attempting to download from the remote repo the dependency's .pom, and
thus the build fails. Sent a note on the Maven dev list for a solution
to prevent it from doing this and look directly in the local repo.
Thanks and will give an update when I make further progress.
Sachin.
Re: progress on mavenizing eclipse plugins
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
On Aug 30, 2005, at 1:53 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
> Geir,
>
> Plan for this is to have the m2 CLI detect project.xml and run
> Maven 1.1 embedded. I think I had this mostly working, but it
> hasn't been bundled with a release yet. I'll take another look.
>
Perfect! Saves me the work.
geir
> - Brett
>
> On 8/30/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Aug 29, 2005, at 2:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
> >
> > Also, will M2 build M1 projects? (Oh, please, please, please say
> > it will...)
>
> According to the maven site, it can't.
>
> I'm going to see if I can install both, and create a maven shell
> script that figures out what the project is, and invokes the correct
> version of maven...
>
>
> --
> Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
> geirm@apache.org
>
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
Re: progress on mavenizing eclipse plugins
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@gmail.com>.
Geir,
Plan for this is to have the m2 CLI detect project.xml and run Maven
1.1embedded. I think I had this mostly working, but it hasn't been
bundled with
a release yet. I'll take another look.
- Brett
On 8/30/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 29, 2005, at 2:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
> >
> > Also, will M2 build M1 projects? (Oh, please, please, please say
> > it will...)
>
> According to the maven site, it can't.
>
> I'm going to see if I can install both, and create a maven shell
> script that figures out what the project is, and invokes the correct
> version of maven...
>
>
> --
> Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
> geirm@apache.org
>
>
>
Re: progress on mavenizing eclipse plugins
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
On Aug 29, 2005, at 2:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
> Also, will M2 build M1 projects? (Oh, please, please, please say
> it will...)
According to the maven site, it can't.
I'm going to see if I can install both, and create a maven shell
script that figures out what the project is, and invokes the correct
version of maven...
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
Re: progress on mavenizing eclipse plugins
Posted by Jeff Genender <jg...@savoirtech.com>.
Sachin Patel wrote:
> Due to the current debates :) I'm trying to do both M1 and M2 in
> parallel, but probably M2 will be finished first.
Thank you, I think this ultimately will be the best solution.
Jeff
>
> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 29, 2005, at 9:43 AM, Jeff Genender wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sachin Patel wrote:
>>>
>>>> So after sitting down yesterday and doing a little reading... I
>>>> have a much better understanding of Maven. :) I've decided to go
>>>> with using M2, one of the reasons which I'm probably going to end
>>>> up having to write a plugin and want to avoid massive jelly
>>>> scripts. :)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hang on there...
>>>
>>> Although I like your enthusiasm regarding M2, and I personally can't
>>> wait to start converting over to M2, we really need to keep the
>>> thoughts of the end users in our development. To have to download 2
>>> build tools in order build all of Geronimo, IMHO, is very bad. I
>>> hope that you rethink this and do it in M1. We are here to help you
>>> in getting your project up and running. There is nothing you cannot
>>> do in M1...
>>>
>>> If we have a rollout schedule for moving Geronimo to M2, then I
>>> would be open to this. But unfortunately its not officially on the
>>> radar. I would only ask that we are consistent in the build tool
>>> selection.
>>
>>
>> Jeff,
>>
>> I respectfully disagree with you here. I see your point about making
>> it easy for users, but overall, how many users will want to build the
>> plugin in the time between now and getting Geronimo over to M2? I
>> know we don't know that latter time yet, but I think it's Soon(tm),
>> and I assume that peeps focused on working on the plugin will be a
>> different set of people building the server....
>>
>> OTOH, what is the *fastest* way to get this to build?
>>
>> Also, will M2 build M1 projects? (Oh, please, please, please say it
>> will...)
>>
>> geir
>>
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>>
>>>> M1 provided a convenient jar override feature where I could the
>>>> specify the explicit path to dependencies outside of the repo.
>>>> This makes things easier as I can just point to the ${eclipse-
>>>> home}/plugins/blah.jar. Unfortunately M2 doesn't have this. So
>>>> after talking to some of the very helpful Maven folks, the only
>>>> current way to do this is to have the eclipse jars inside the local
>>>> repo. To make it even more painful, from looks of things I don't
>>>> think I can just can't download an eclipse image, and do a
>>>> "select-all" and copy in the all jars. It looks like I'm going to
>>>> have to create the "maven convention" path for each jar.
>>>> So from an Eclipse install, for each plugin I would need to copy
>>>> and rename the jar from
>>>> ${eclipse-install}/eclipse/plugins/
>>>> org.eclipse.core.resources_3.1.0.jar
>>>> to...
>>>> ${local_repo}/eclipse-plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources/3.1.0/
>>>> org.eclipse.core.resources-3.1.0.jar I'm still having issues though
>>>> as even when I try to build offline it is attempting to download
>>>> from the remote repo the dependency's .pom, and thus the build
>>>> fails. Sent a note on the Maven dev list for a solution to prevent
>>>> it from doing this and look directly in the local repo.
>>>> Thanks and will give an update when I make further progress.
>>>> Sachin.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
Re: progress on mavenizing eclipse plugins
Posted by Sachin Patel <sp...@gmail.com>.
Due to the current debates :) I'm trying to do both M1 and M2 in
parallel, but probably M2 will be finished first.
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
> On Aug 29, 2005, at 9:43 AM, Jeff Genender wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Sachin Patel wrote:
>>
>>> So after sitting down yesterday and doing a little reading... I
>>> have a much better understanding of Maven. :) I've decided to go
>>> with using M2, one of the reasons which I'm probably going to end
>>> up having to write a plugin and want to avoid massive jelly
>>> scripts. :)
>>>
>>
>> Hang on there...
>>
>> Although I like your enthusiasm regarding M2, and I personally can't
>> wait to start converting over to M2, we really need to keep the
>> thoughts of the end users in our development. To have to download 2
>> build tools in order build all of Geronimo, IMHO, is very bad. I
>> hope that you rethink this and do it in M1. We are here to help you
>> in getting your project up and running. There is nothing you cannot
>> do in M1...
>>
>> If we have a rollout schedule for moving Geronimo to M2, then I
>> would be open to this. But unfortunately its not officially on the
>> radar. I would only ask that we are consistent in the build tool
>> selection.
>
> Jeff,
>
> I respectfully disagree with you here. I see your point about making
> it easy for users, but overall, how many users will want to build the
> plugin in the time between now and getting Geronimo over to M2? I
> know we don't know that latter time yet, but I think it's Soon(tm),
> and I assume that peeps focused on working on the plugin will be a
> different set of people building the server....
>
> OTOH, what is the *fastest* way to get this to build?
>
> Also, will M2 build M1 projects? (Oh, please, please, please say it
> will...)
>
> geir
>
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>
>>> M1 provided a convenient jar override feature where I could the
>>> specify the explicit path to dependencies outside of the repo.
>>> This makes things easier as I can just point to the ${eclipse-
>>> home}/plugins/blah.jar. Unfortunately M2 doesn't have this. So
>>> after talking to some of the very helpful Maven folks, the only
>>> current way to do this is to have the eclipse jars inside the local
>>> repo. To make it even more painful, from looks of things I don't
>>> think I can just can't download an eclipse image, and do a
>>> "select-all" and copy in the all jars. It looks like I'm going to
>>> have to create the "maven convention" path for each jar.
>>> So from an Eclipse install, for each plugin I would need to copy
>>> and rename the jar from
>>> ${eclipse-install}/eclipse/plugins/
>>> org.eclipse.core.resources_3.1.0.jar
>>> to...
>>> ${local_repo}/eclipse-plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources/3.1.0/
>>> org.eclipse.core.resources-3.1.0.jar I'm still having issues though
>>> as even when I try to build offline it is attempting to download
>>> from the remote repo the dependency's .pom, and thus the build
>>> fails. Sent a note on the Maven dev list for a solution to prevent
>>> it from doing this and look directly in the local repo.
>>> Thanks and will give an update when I make further progress.
>>> Sachin.
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: progress on mavenizing eclipse plugins
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
On Aug 29, 2005, at 9:43 AM, Jeff Genender wrote:
>
>
> Sachin Patel wrote:
>
>> So after sitting down yesterday and doing a little reading... I
>> have a much better understanding of Maven. :) I've decided to go
>> with using M2, one of the reasons which I'm probably going to end
>> up having to write a plugin and want to avoid massive jelly
>> scripts. :)
>>
>
> Hang on there...
>
> Although I like your enthusiasm regarding M2, and I personally
> can't wait to start converting over to M2, we really need to keep
> the thoughts of the end users in our development. To have to
> download 2 build tools in order build all of Geronimo, IMHO, is
> very bad. I hope that you rethink this and do it in M1. We are
> here to help you in getting your project up and running. There is
> nothing you cannot do in M1...
>
> If we have a rollout schedule for moving Geronimo to M2, then I
> would be open to this. But unfortunately its not officially on the
> radar. I would only ask that we are consistent in the build tool
> selection.
Jeff,
I respectfully disagree with you here. I see your point about making
it easy for users, but overall, how many users will want to build the
plugin in the time between now and getting Geronimo over to M2? I
know we don't know that latter time yet, but I think it's Soon(tm),
and I assume that peeps focused on working on the plugin will be a
different set of people building the server....
OTOH, what is the *fastest* way to get this to build?
Also, will M2 build M1 projects? (Oh, please, please, please say it
will...)
geir
>
> Jeff
>
>
>> M1 provided a convenient jar override feature where I could the
>> specify the explicit path to dependencies outside of the repo.
>> This makes things easier as I can just point to the ${eclipse-
>> home}/plugins/blah.jar. Unfortunately M2 doesn't have this. So
>> after talking to some of the very helpful Maven folks, the only
>> current way to do this is to have the eclipse jars inside the
>> local repo. To make it even more painful, from looks of things I
>> don't think I can just can't download an eclipse image, and do a
>> "select-all" and copy in the all jars. It looks like I'm going to
>> have to create the "maven convention" path for each jar.
>> So from an Eclipse install, for each plugin I would need to copy
>> and rename the jar from
>> ${eclipse-install}/eclipse/plugins/
>> org.eclipse.core.resources_3.1.0.jar
>> to...
>> ${local_repo}/eclipse-plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources/3.1.0/
>> org.eclipse.core.resources-3.1.0.jar I'm still having issues
>> though as even when I try to build offline it is attempting to
>> download from the remote repo the dependency's .pom, and thus the
>> build fails. Sent a note on the Maven dev list for a solution to
>> prevent it from doing this and look directly in the local repo.
>> Thanks and will give an update when I make further progress.
>> Sachin.
>>
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
Re: progress on mavenizing eclipse plugins
Posted by Sachin Patel <sp...@gmail.com>.
Correction: ${m1-repo}/group/jars/artifact-1.0.jar
Sachin Patel wrote:
> Yes, pretty sure. The layout of the m1 vs m2 repositories is
> different. In m1 you would have
>
> ${m1-repo}/group/artifact-1.0.jar
> ${m1-repo}/group/artifact-2.0.jar
>
> The poms would be under ${m1-repo}/group/poms/
>
> Where in 2.0 it installs them as ...
>
> ${m1-repo}/group/artifact/1.0/artifact-1.0.jar
> ${m1-repo}/group/artifact/2.0/artifact-2.0.jar
>
> And it installs the pom in the individual folder containing each jar.
>
> David Jencks wrote:
>> well, I disagree....
>>
>> I think an appropriate strategy is to get the build working with m2,
>> including writing the maven plugin you will need, and then call that
>> maven plugin from m1 to create an m1 build. If we are really lucky
>> the geronimo m2 build will be far enough along by the time sachin
>> gets the m2 maven plugin working properly that he won't have to deal
>> with m1:-) I also think an example of using m2 in our very own
>> build may help to encourage us all to pitch in on the geronimo m2
>> build.
>>
>>
>> btw are you sure about the location of the eclipse jars in the m2
>> repository? I haven't used m2 at all but I wonder if the attempt to
>> download the pom is due to it being in the wrong place.
>>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>> On Aug 29, 2005, at 7:57 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>>
>>> I think simpler is better and more consumable. +1 to Stay with Maven 1
>>>
>>> Jeff Genender wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sachin Patel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I totally agree that downloading 2 build tools for end users is
>>>>> bad. However, for this particular case I don't think doing this
>>>>> is AS bad. From a users standpoint, there going to just
>>>>> download the built image from the site and install it onto
>>>>> eclipse. From a developers standpoint, regardless of wether this
>>>>> is built using M1 or M2, most eclipse end users are most likely
>>>>> not going to build with either of them, and they will just do
>>>>> what is familiar for them and import the projects into an Eclipse
>>>>> IDE and build from within there.
>>>>> If you still feel strongly against it, I don't mind going back to M1.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I definately don't want to be the party pooper here ;-) But I
>>>> think we need to stay the course of consistency. Lets get some
>>>> feedback of others and then we can come to some concensus on this
>>>> issue. I do feel strongly about this, but its the decision of the
>>>> team, so lets get some more feedback. This will be a real PITA if
>>>> we need to do this with 2 build tools. Also, I am fine if you
>>>> want to do it in both M1 and M2, so this would suffice. But I
>>>> really think you need to support M1 right now.
>>>>
>>>> Again, if we can get a roll out schedule with getting Geronimo
>>>> converted, then I would be ok with M2.
>>>>
>>>> Jeff
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeff Genender wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sachin Patel wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So after sitting down yesterday and doing a little reading... I
>>>>>>> have a much better understanding of Maven. :) I've decided to
>>>>>>> go with using M2, one of the reasons which I'm probably going
>>>>>>> to end up having to write a plugin and want to avoid massive
>>>>>>> jelly scripts. :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hang on there...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Although I like your enthusiasm regarding M2, and I personally
>>>>>> can't wait to start converting over to M2, we really need to
>>>>>> keep the thoughts of the end users in our development. To have
>>>>>> to download 2 build tools in order build all of Geronimo, IMHO,
>>>>>> is very bad. I hope that you rethink this and do it in M1. We
>>>>>> are here to help you in getting your project up and running.
>>>>>> There is nothing you cannot do in M1...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If we have a rollout schedule for moving Geronimo to M2, then I
>>>>>> would be open to this. But unfortunately its not officially on
>>>>>> the radar. I would only ask that we are consistent in the build
>>>>>> tool selection.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jeff
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> M1 provided a convenient jar override feature where I could the
>>>>>>> specify the explicit path to dependencies outside of the repo.
>>>>>>> This makes things easier as I can just point to the
>>>>>>> ${eclipse-home}/plugins/blah.jar. Unfortunately M2 doesn't
>>>>>>> have this. So after talking to some of the very helpful Maven
>>>>>>> folks, the only current way to do this is to have the eclipse
>>>>>>> jars inside the local repo. To make it even more painful, from
>>>>>>> looks of things I don't think I can just can't download an
>>>>>>> eclipse image, and do a "select-all" and copy in the all jars.
>>>>>>> It looks like I'm going to have to create the "maven
>>>>>>> convention" path for each jar.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So from an Eclipse install, for each plugin I would need to
>>>>>>> copy and rename the jar from
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ${eclipse-install}/eclipse/plugins/
>>>>>>> org.eclipse.core.resources_3.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> to...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ${local_repo}/eclipse-plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources/3.1.0/
>>>>>>> org.eclipse.core.resources-3.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm still having issues though as even when I try to build
>>>>>>> offline it is attempting to download from the remote repo the
>>>>>>> dependency's .pom, and thus the build fails. Sent a note on
>>>>>>> the Maven dev list for a solution to prevent it from doing this
>>>>>>> and look directly in the local repo.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks and will give an update when I make further progress.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sachin.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: progress on mavenizing eclipse plugins
Posted by Sachin Patel <sp...@gmail.com>.
Yes, pretty sure. The layout of the m1 vs m2 repositories is
different. In m1 you would have
${m1-repo}/group/artifact-1.0.jar
${m1-repo}/group/artifact-2.0.jar
The poms would be under ${m1-repo}/group/poms/
Where in 2.0 it installs them as ...
${m1-repo}/group/artifact/1.0/artifact-1.0.jar
${m1-repo}/group/artifact/2.0/artifact-2.0.jar
And it installs the pom in the individual folder containing each jar.
David Jencks wrote:
> well, I disagree....
>
> I think an appropriate strategy is to get the build working with m2,
> including writing the maven plugin you will need, and then call that
> maven plugin from m1 to create an m1 build. If we are really lucky
> the geronimo m2 build will be far enough along by the time sachin
> gets the m2 maven plugin working properly that he won't have to deal
> with m1:-) I also think an example of using m2 in our very own build
> may help to encourage us all to pitch in on the geronimo m2 build.
>
>
> btw are you sure about the location of the eclipse jars in the m2
> repository? I haven't used m2 at all but I wonder if the attempt to
> download the pom is due to it being in the wrong place.
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
> On Aug 29, 2005, at 7:57 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
>> I think simpler is better and more consumable. +1 to Stay with Maven 1
>>
>> Jeff Genender wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sachin Patel wrote:
>>>
>>>> I totally agree that downloading 2 build tools for end users is
>>>> bad. However, for this particular case I don't think doing this
>>>> is AS bad. From a users standpoint, there going to just download
>>>> the built image from the site and install it onto eclipse. From
>>>> a developers standpoint, regardless of wether this is built using
>>>> M1 or M2, most eclipse end users are most likely not going to
>>>> build with either of them, and they will just do what is familiar
>>>> for them and import the projects into an Eclipse IDE and build
>>>> from within there.
>>>> If you still feel strongly against it, I don't mind going back to M1.
>>>
>>>
>>> I definately don't want to be the party pooper here ;-) But I
>>> think we need to stay the course of consistency. Lets get some
>>> feedback of others and then we can come to some concensus on this
>>> issue. I do feel strongly about this, but its the decision of the
>>> team, so lets get some more feedback. This will be a real PITA if
>>> we need to do this with 2 build tools. Also, I am fine if you want
>>> to do it in both M1 and M2, so this would suffice. But I really
>>> think you need to support M1 right now.
>>>
>>> Again, if we can get a roll out schedule with getting Geronimo
>>> converted, then I would be ok with M2.
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jeff Genender wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sachin Patel wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> So after sitting down yesterday and doing a little reading... I
>>>>>> have a much better understanding of Maven. :) I've decided to go
>>>>>> with using M2, one of the reasons which I'm probably going to
>>>>>> end up having to write a plugin and want to avoid massive jelly
>>>>>> scripts. :)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hang on there...
>>>>>
>>>>> Although I like your enthusiasm regarding M2, and I personally
>>>>> can't wait to start converting over to M2, we really need to keep
>>>>> the thoughts of the end users in our development. To have to
>>>>> download 2 build tools in order build all of Geronimo, IMHO, is
>>>>> very bad. I hope that you rethink this and do it in M1. We are
>>>>> here to help you in getting your project up and running. There
>>>>> is nothing you cannot do in M1...
>>>>>
>>>>> If we have a rollout schedule for moving Geronimo to M2, then I
>>>>> would be open to this. But unfortunately its not officially on
>>>>> the radar. I would only ask that we are consistent in the build
>>>>> tool selection.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeff
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> M1 provided a convenient jar override feature where I could the
>>>>>> specify the explicit path to dependencies outside of the repo.
>>>>>> This makes things easier as I can just point to the
>>>>>> ${eclipse-home}/plugins/blah.jar. Unfortunately M2 doesn't have
>>>>>> this. So after talking to some of the very helpful Maven folks,
>>>>>> the only current way to do this is to have the eclipse jars
>>>>>> inside the local repo. To make it even more painful, from looks
>>>>>> of things I don't think I can just can't download an eclipse
>>>>>> image, and do a "select-all" and copy in the all jars. It looks
>>>>>> like I'm going to have to create the "maven convention" path for
>>>>>> each jar.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So from an Eclipse install, for each plugin I would need to copy
>>>>>> and rename the jar from
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ${eclipse-install}/eclipse/plugins/
>>>>>> org.eclipse.core.resources_3.1.0.jar
>>>>>>
>>>>>> to...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ${local_repo}/eclipse-plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources/3.1.0/
>>>>>> org.eclipse.core.resources-3.1.0.jar
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm still having issues though as even when I try to build
>>>>>> offline it is attempting to download from the remote repo the
>>>>>> dependency's .pom, and thus the build fails. Sent a note on the
>>>>>> Maven dev list for a solution to prevent it from doing this and
>>>>>> look directly in the local repo.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks and will give an update when I make further progress.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sachin.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: progress on mavenizing eclipse plugins
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
I'm with david on this.
Normally, I would encourage Sachin to use m1, but the eclipse build
depends on having transitive dependencies and m1 doesn't have them.
I think having an m2 build is better then having no build, which is
what I think we would get with m1.
-dain
On Aug 29, 2005, at 8:20 AM, David Jencks wrote:
> well, I disagree....
>
> I think an appropriate strategy is to get the build working with
> m2, including writing the maven plugin you will need, and then call
> that maven plugin from m1 to create an m1 build. If we are really
> lucky the geronimo m2 build will be far enough along by the time
> sachin gets the m2 maven plugin working properly that he won't have
> to deal with m1:-) I also think an example of using m2 in our very
> own build may help to encourage us all to pitch in on the geronimo
> m2 build.
>
>
> btw are you sure about the location of the eclipse jars in the m2
> repository? I haven't used m2 at all but I wonder if the attempt to
> download the pom is due to it being in the wrong place.
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
> On Aug 29, 2005, at 7:57 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
>
>> I think simpler is better and more consumable. +1 to Stay with
>> Maven 1
>>
>> Jeff Genender wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sachin Patel wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I totally agree that downloading 2 build tools for end users is
>>>> bad. However, for this particular case I don't think doing this
>>>> is AS bad. From a users standpoint, there going to just
>>>> download the built image from the site and install it onto
>>>> eclipse. From a developers standpoint, regardless of wether
>>>> this is built using M1 or M2, most eclipse end users are most
>>>> likely not going to build with either of them, and they will
>>>> just do what is familiar for them and import the projects into
>>>> an Eclipse IDE and build from within there.
>>>> If you still feel strongly against it, I don't mind going back
>>>> to M1.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I definately don't want to be the party pooper here ;-) But I
>>> think we need to stay the course of consistency. Lets get some
>>> feedback of others and then we can come to some concensus on this
>>> issue. I do feel strongly about this, but its the decision of
>>> the team, so lets get some more feedback. This will be a real
>>> PITA if we need to do this with 2 build tools. Also, I am fine
>>> if you want to do it in both M1 and M2, so this would suffice.
>>> But I really think you need to support M1 right now.
>>>
>>> Again, if we can get a roll out schedule with getting Geronimo
>>> converted, then I would be ok with M2.
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jeff Genender wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sachin Patel wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> So after sitting down yesterday and doing a little reading...
>>>>>> I have a much better understanding of Maven. :) I've decided
>>>>>> to go with using M2, one of the reasons which I'm probably
>>>>>> going to end up having to write a plugin and want to avoid
>>>>>> massive jelly scripts. :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hang on there...
>>>>>
>>>>> Although I like your enthusiasm regarding M2, and I personally
>>>>> can't wait to start converting over to M2, we really need to
>>>>> keep the thoughts of the end users in our development. To have
>>>>> to download 2 build tools in order build all of Geronimo, IMHO,
>>>>> is very bad. I hope that you rethink this and do it in M1. We
>>>>> are here to help you in getting your project up and running.
>>>>> There is nothing you cannot do in M1...
>>>>>
>>>>> If we have a rollout schedule for moving Geronimo to M2, then I
>>>>> would be open to this. But unfortunately its not officially on
>>>>> the radar. I would only ask that we are consistent in the
>>>>> build tool selection.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeff
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> M1 provided a convenient jar override feature where I could
>>>>>> the specify the explicit path to dependencies outside of the
>>>>>> repo. This makes things easier as I can just point to the $
>>>>>> {eclipse-home}/plugins/blah.jar. Unfortunately M2 doesn't
>>>>>> have this. So after talking to some of the very helpful Maven
>>>>>> folks, the only current way to do this is to have the eclipse
>>>>>> jars inside the local repo. To make it even more painful,
>>>>>> from looks of things I don't think I can just can't download
>>>>>> an eclipse image, and do a "select-all" and copy in the all
>>>>>> jars. It looks like I'm going to have to create the "maven
>>>>>> convention" path for each jar.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So from an Eclipse install, for each plugin I would need to
>>>>>> copy and rename the jar from
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ${eclipse-install}/eclipse/plugins/
>>>>>> org.eclipse.core.resources_3.1.0.jar
>>>>>>
>>>>>> to...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ${local_repo}/eclipse-plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources/3.1.0/
>>>>>> org.eclipse.core.resources-3.1.0.jar
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm still having issues though as even when I try to build
>>>>>> offline it is attempting to download from the remote repo the
>>>>>> dependency's .pom, and thus the build fails. Sent a note on
>>>>>> the Maven dev list for a solution to prevent it from doing
>>>>>> this and look directly in the local repo.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks and will give an update when I make further progress.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sachin.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: progress on mavenizing eclipse plugins
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
well, I disagree....
I think an appropriate strategy is to get the build working with m2,
including writing the maven plugin you will need, and then call that
maven plugin from m1 to create an m1 build. If we are really lucky the
geronimo m2 build will be far enough along by the time sachin gets the
m2 maven plugin working properly that he won't have to deal with m1:-)
I also think an example of using m2 in our very own build may help to
encourage us all to pitch in on the geronimo m2 build.
btw are you sure about the location of the eclipse jars in the m2
repository? I haven't used m2 at all but I wonder if the attempt to
download the pom is due to it being in the wrong place.
thanks
david jencks
On Aug 29, 2005, at 7:57 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> I think simpler is better and more consumable. +1 to Stay with Maven 1
>
> Jeff Genender wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Sachin Patel wrote:
>>
>>> I totally agree that downloading 2 build tools for end users is bad.
>>> However, for this particular case I don't think doing this is AS
>>> bad. From a users standpoint, there going to just download the
>>> built image from the site and install it onto eclipse. From a
>>> developers standpoint, regardless of wether this is built using M1
>>> or M2, most eclipse end users are most likely not going to build
>>> with either of them, and they will just do what is familiar for them
>>> and import the projects into an Eclipse IDE and build from within
>>> there.
>>> If you still feel strongly against it, I don't mind going back to M1.
>>
>>
>> I definately don't want to be the party pooper here ;-) But I think
>> we need to stay the course of consistency. Lets get some feedback of
>> others and then we can come to some concensus on this issue. I do
>> feel strongly about this, but its the decision of the team, so lets
>> get some more feedback. This will be a real PITA if we need to do
>> this with 2 build tools. Also, I am fine if you want to do it in
>> both M1 and M2, so this would suffice. But I really think you need
>> to support M1 right now.
>>
>> Again, if we can get a roll out schedule with getting Geronimo
>> converted, then I would be ok with M2.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>>
>>> Jeff Genender wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sachin Patel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> So after sitting down yesterday and doing a little reading... I
>>>>> have a much better understanding of Maven. :) I've decided to go
>>>>> with using M2, one of the reasons which I'm probably going to end
>>>>> up having to write a plugin and want to avoid massive jelly
>>>>> scripts. :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hang on there...
>>>>
>>>> Although I like your enthusiasm regarding M2, and I personally
>>>> can't wait to start converting over to M2, we really need to keep
>>>> the thoughts of the end users in our development. To have to
>>>> download 2 build tools in order build all of Geronimo, IMHO, is
>>>> very bad. I hope that you rethink this and do it in M1. We are
>>>> here to help you in getting your project up and running. There is
>>>> nothing you cannot do in M1...
>>>>
>>>> If we have a rollout schedule for moving Geronimo to M2, then I
>>>> would be open to this. But unfortunately its not officially on the
>>>> radar. I would only ask that we are consistent in the build tool
>>>> selection.
>>>>
>>>> Jeff
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> M1 provided a convenient jar override feature where I could the
>>>>> specify the explicit path to dependencies outside of the repo.
>>>>> This makes things easier as I can just point to the
>>>>> ${eclipse-home}/plugins/blah.jar. Unfortunately M2 doesn't have
>>>>> this. So after talking to some of the very helpful Maven folks,
>>>>> the only current way to do this is to have the eclipse jars inside
>>>>> the local repo. To make it even more painful, from looks of
>>>>> things I don't think I can just can't download an eclipse image,
>>>>> and do a "select-all" and copy in the all jars. It looks like I'm
>>>>> going to have to create the "maven convention" path for each jar.
>>>>>
>>>>> So from an Eclipse install, for each plugin I would need to copy
>>>>> and rename the jar from
>>>>>
>>>>> ${eclipse-install}/eclipse/plugins/
>>>>> org.eclipse.core.resources_3.1.0.jar
>>>>>
>>>>> to...
>>>>>
>>>>> ${local_repo}/eclipse-plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources/3.1.0/
>>>>> org.eclipse.core.resources-3.1.0.jar
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm still having issues though as even when I try to build offline
>>>>> it is attempting to download from the remote repo the dependency's
>>>>> .pom, and thus the build fails. Sent a note on the Maven dev list
>>>>> for a solution to prevent it from doing this and look directly in
>>>>> the local repo.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks and will give an update when I make further progress.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sachin.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Re: progress on mavenizing eclipse plugins
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
I think simpler is better and more consumable. +1 to Stay with Maven 1
Jeff Genender wrote:
>
>
> Sachin Patel wrote:
>
>> I totally agree that downloading 2 build tools for end users is bad.
>> However, for this particular case I don't think doing this is AS
>> bad. From a users standpoint, there going to just download the
>> built image from the site and install it onto eclipse. From a
>> developers standpoint, regardless of wether this is built using M1 or
>> M2, most eclipse end users are most likely not going to build with
>> either of them, and they will just do what is familiar for them and
>> import the projects into an Eclipse IDE and build from within there.
>> If you still feel strongly against it, I don't mind going back to M1.
>
>
> I definately don't want to be the party pooper here ;-) But I think
> we need to stay the course of consistency. Lets get some feedback of
> others and then we can come to some concensus on this issue. I do
> feel strongly about this, but its the decision of the team, so lets
> get some more feedback. This will be a real PITA if we need to do
> this with 2 build tools. Also, I am fine if you want to do it in both
> M1 and M2, so this would suffice. But I really think you need to
> support M1 right now.
>
> Again, if we can get a roll out schedule with getting Geronimo
> converted, then I would be ok with M2.
>
> Jeff
>
>>
>> Jeff Genender wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sachin Patel wrote:
>>>
>>>> So after sitting down yesterday and doing a little reading... I
>>>> have a much better understanding of Maven. :) I've decided to go
>>>> with using M2, one of the reasons which I'm probably going to end
>>>> up having to write a plugin and want to avoid massive jelly
>>>> scripts. :)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hang on there...
>>>
>>> Although I like your enthusiasm regarding M2, and I personally can't
>>> wait to start converting over to M2, we really need to keep the
>>> thoughts of the end users in our development. To have to download 2
>>> build tools in order build all of Geronimo, IMHO, is very bad. I
>>> hope that you rethink this and do it in M1. We are here to help you
>>> in getting your project up and running. There is nothing you cannot
>>> do in M1...
>>>
>>> If we have a rollout schedule for moving Geronimo to M2, then I
>>> would be open to this. But unfortunately its not officially on the
>>> radar. I would only ask that we are consistent in the build tool
>>> selection.
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>>>
>>>> M1 provided a convenient jar override feature where I could the
>>>> specify the explicit path to dependencies outside of the repo.
>>>> This makes things easier as I can just point to the
>>>> ${eclipse-home}/plugins/blah.jar. Unfortunately M2 doesn't have
>>>> this. So after talking to some of the very helpful Maven folks,
>>>> the only current way to do this is to have the eclipse jars inside
>>>> the local repo. To make it even more painful, from looks of things
>>>> I don't think I can just can't download an eclipse image, and do a
>>>> "select-all" and copy in the all jars. It looks like I'm going to
>>>> have to create the "maven convention" path for each jar.
>>>>
>>>> So from an Eclipse install, for each plugin I would need to copy
>>>> and rename the jar from
>>>>
>>>> ${eclipse-install}/eclipse/plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources_3.1.0.jar
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> to...
>>>>
>>>> ${local_repo}/eclipse-plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources/3.1.0/org.eclipse.core.resources-3.1.0.jar
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm still having issues though as even when I try to build offline
>>>> it is attempting to download from the remote repo the dependency's
>>>> .pom, and thus the build fails. Sent a note on the Maven dev list
>>>> for a solution to prevent it from doing this and look directly in
>>>> the local repo.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks and will give an update when I make further progress.
>>>>
>>>> Sachin.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
>
>
Re: progress on mavenizing eclipse plugins
Posted by Jeff Genender <jg...@savoirtech.com>.
Sachin Patel wrote:
> I totally agree that downloading 2 build tools for end users is bad.
> However, for this particular case I don't think doing this is AS bad.
> From a users standpoint, there going to just download the built image
> from the site and install it onto eclipse. From a developers
> standpoint, regardless of wether this is built using M1 or M2, most
> eclipse end users are most likely not going to build with either of
> them, and they will just do what is familiar for them and import the
> projects into an Eclipse IDE and build from within there.
> If you still feel strongly against it, I don't mind going back to M1.
I definately don't want to be the party pooper here ;-) But I think we
need to stay the course of consistency. Lets get some feedback of
others and then we can come to some concensus on this issue. I do feel
strongly about this, but its the decision of the team, so lets get some
more feedback. This will be a real PITA if we need to do this with 2
build tools. Also, I am fine if you want to do it in both M1 and M2, so
this would suffice. But I really think you need to support M1 right now.
Again, if we can get a roll out schedule with getting Geronimo
converted, then I would be ok with M2.
Jeff
>
> Jeff Genender wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Sachin Patel wrote:
>>
>>> So after sitting down yesterday and doing a little reading... I have
>>> a much better understanding of Maven. :) I've decided to go with
>>> using M2, one of the reasons which I'm probably going to end up
>>> having to write a plugin and want to avoid massive jelly scripts. :)
>>
>>
>> Hang on there...
>>
>> Although I like your enthusiasm regarding M2, and I personally can't
>> wait to start converting over to M2, we really need to keep the
>> thoughts of the end users in our development. To have to download 2
>> build tools in order build all of Geronimo, IMHO, is very bad. I hope
>> that you rethink this and do it in M1. We are here to help you in
>> getting your project up and running. There is nothing you cannot do
>> in M1...
>>
>> If we have a rollout schedule for moving Geronimo to M2, then I would
>> be open to this. But unfortunately its not officially on the radar.
>> I would only ask that we are consistent in the build tool selection.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>>
>>> M1 provided a convenient jar override feature where I could the
>>> specify the explicit path to dependencies outside of the repo. This
>>> makes things easier as I can just point to the
>>> ${eclipse-home}/plugins/blah.jar. Unfortunately M2 doesn't have
>>> this. So after talking to some of the very helpful Maven folks, the
>>> only current way to do this is to have the eclipse jars inside the
>>> local repo. To make it even more painful, from looks of things I
>>> don't think I can just can't download an eclipse image, and do a
>>> "select-all" and copy in the all jars. It looks like I'm going to
>>> have to create the "maven convention" path for each jar.
>>>
>>> So from an Eclipse install, for each plugin I would need to copy and
>>> rename the jar from
>>>
>>> ${eclipse-install}/eclipse/plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources_3.1.0.jar
>>>
>>> to...
>>>
>>> ${local_repo}/eclipse-plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources/3.1.0/org.eclipse.core.resources-3.1.0.jar
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm still having issues though as even when I try to build offline it
>>> is attempting to download from the remote repo the dependency's .pom,
>>> and thus the build fails. Sent a note on the Maven dev list for a
>>> solution to prevent it from doing this and look directly in the local
>>> repo.
>>>
>>> Thanks and will give an update when I make further progress.
>>>
>>> Sachin.
>>>
>>>
>>
Re: progress on mavenizing eclipse plugins
Posted by Sachin Patel <sp...@gmail.com>.
I totally agree that downloading 2 build tools for end users is bad.
However, for this particular case I don't think doing this is AS bad.
From a users standpoint, there going to just download the built image
from the site and install it onto eclipse. From a developers
standpoint, regardless of wether this is built using M1 or M2, most
eclipse end users are most likely not going to build with either of
them, and they will just do what is familiar for them and import the
projects into an Eclipse IDE and build from within there.
If you still feel strongly against it, I don't mind going back to M1.
Jeff Genender wrote:
>
>
> Sachin Patel wrote:
>> So after sitting down yesterday and doing a little reading... I have
>> a much better understanding of Maven. :) I've decided to go with
>> using M2, one of the reasons which I'm probably going to end up
>> having to write a plugin and want to avoid massive jelly scripts. :)
>
> Hang on there...
>
> Although I like your enthusiasm regarding M2, and I personally can't
> wait to start converting over to M2, we really need to keep the
> thoughts of the end users in our development. To have to download 2
> build tools in order build all of Geronimo, IMHO, is very bad. I hope
> that you rethink this and do it in M1. We are here to help you in
> getting your project up and running. There is nothing you cannot do
> in M1...
>
> If we have a rollout schedule for moving Geronimo to M2, then I would
> be open to this. But unfortunately its not officially on the radar.
> I would only ask that we are consistent in the build tool selection.
>
> Jeff
>
>>
>> M1 provided a convenient jar override feature where I could the
>> specify the explicit path to dependencies outside of the repo. This
>> makes things easier as I can just point to the
>> ${eclipse-home}/plugins/blah.jar. Unfortunately M2 doesn't have
>> this. So after talking to some of the very helpful Maven folks, the
>> only current way to do this is to have the eclipse jars inside the
>> local repo. To make it even more painful, from looks of things I
>> don't think I can just can't download an eclipse image, and do a
>> "select-all" and copy in the all jars. It looks like I'm going to
>> have to create the "maven convention" path for each jar.
>>
>> So from an Eclipse install, for each plugin I would need to copy and
>> rename the jar from
>>
>> ${eclipse-install}/eclipse/plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources_3.1.0.jar
>>
>> to...
>>
>> ${local_repo}/eclipse-plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources/3.1.0/org.eclipse.core.resources-3.1.0.jar
>>
>>
>> I'm still having issues though as even when I try to build offline it
>> is attempting to download from the remote repo the dependency's .pom,
>> and thus the build fails. Sent a note on the Maven dev list for a
>> solution to prevent it from doing this and look directly in the local
>> repo.
>>
>> Thanks and will give an update when I make further progress.
>>
>> Sachin.
>>
>>
>
Re: progress on mavenizing eclipse plugins
Posted by Jeff Genender <jg...@savoirtech.com>.
Sachin Patel wrote:
> So after sitting down yesterday and doing a little reading... I have a
> much better understanding of Maven. :) I've decided to go with using M2,
> one of the reasons which I'm probably going to end up having to write a
> plugin and want to avoid massive jelly scripts. :)
Hang on there...
Although I like your enthusiasm regarding M2, and I personally can't
wait to start converting over to M2, we really need to keep the thoughts
of the end users in our development. To have to download 2 build tools
in order build all of Geronimo, IMHO, is very bad. I hope that you
rethink this and do it in M1. We are here to help you in getting your
project up and running. There is nothing you cannot do in M1...
If we have a rollout schedule for moving Geronimo to M2, then I would be
open to this. But unfortunately its not officially on the radar. I
would only ask that we are consistent in the build tool selection.
Jeff
>
> M1 provided a convenient jar override feature where I could the specify
> the explicit path to dependencies outside of the repo. This makes
> things easier as I can just point to the
> ${eclipse-home}/plugins/blah.jar. Unfortunately M2 doesn't have this.
> So after talking to some of the very helpful Maven folks, the only
> current way to do this is to have the eclipse jars inside the local
> repo. To make it even more painful, from looks of things I don't think
> I can just can't download an eclipse image, and do a "select-all" and
> copy in the all jars. It looks like I'm going to have to create the
> "maven convention" path for each jar.
>
> So from an Eclipse install, for each plugin I would need to copy and
> rename the jar from
>
> ${eclipse-install}/eclipse/plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources_3.1.0.jar
>
> to...
>
> ${local_repo}/eclipse-plugins/org.eclipse.core.resources/3.1.0/org.eclipse.core.resources-3.1.0.jar
>
>
> I'm still having issues though as even when I try to build offline it is
> attempting to download from the remote repo the dependency's .pom, and
> thus the build fails. Sent a note on the Maven dev list for a solution
> to prevent it from doing this and look directly in the local repo.
>
> Thanks and will give an update when I make further progress.
>
> Sachin.
>
>