You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> on 2008/01/11 07:12:14 UTC
Shouldn't subprojects use their file system parents as maven parents?
After the reorganization into plugins most everything still has its
old pom parent, either o.a.g.modules/modules or o.a.g.plugins/
plugins. This seems to me like a bad idea.
I don't see any problem fixing this for jars, but cars would need the
car plugin setup moved to perhaps the root pom.... I don't know if
that will work.
I opened GERONIMO-2747 about this.
Anyone else think this should be fixed before 2.1 goes out?
thanks
david jencks
Re: Shouldn't subprojects use their file system parents as maven parents?
Posted by Prasad Kashyap <go...@gmail.com>.
My thinking on this was to leave it as is for 2.1. We fix this right
for 2.2, when we split the trunk into different svn trees.
Moving the c-m-p configuration settings from configs parent pom to the
root pom is not a problem. It is the boatload of property settings
that will cause Jason good grief :-)
Cheers
Prasad
On Jan 11, 2008 1:12 AM, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> After the reorganization into plugins most everything still has its
> old pom parent, either o.a.g.modules/modules or o.a.g.plugins/
> plugins. This seems to me like a bad idea.
>
> I don't see any problem fixing this for jars, but cars would need the
> car plugin setup moved to perhaps the root pom.... I don't know if
> that will work.
>
> I opened GERONIMO-2747 about this.
>
> Anyone else think this should be fixed before 2.1 goes out?
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
>
Re: Shouldn't subprojects use their file system parents as maven parents?
Posted by Jacek Laskowski <ja...@laskowski.net.pl>.
On Jan 11, 2008 9:27 AM, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I guess we'd have to ask a maven expert for a real answer, I just
> have a feeling it will lead to trouble, but...
...
> The <relativePath> is just wrong. If we were to make it accurate it
> would be
>
> <parent>
> <groupId>org.apache.geronimo.configs</groupId>
> <artifactId>configs</artifactId>
> <version>2.1-SNAPSHOT</version>
> <relativePath>../../framework/configs/pom.xml</relativePath>
> </parent>
Ah, that's exactly what I've been thinking about recently. I couldn't
figure out why it is needed at all, but didn't ask either. I think
Jason could chime in and explain why it is there and how (if any) the
change could break maven.
(It's been a while since we migrated from ant to maven. Anybody fancy
following the route that Ode chose and migrate to buildr? ;-))
Jacek
--
Jacek Laskowski
http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl
Re: Shouldn't subprojects use their file system parents as maven parents?
Posted by Anita Kulshreshtha <a_...@yahoo.com>.
IIRC and [1], the relative path is used if the parent artifact is not
already in the local repository. So a build from the subproject
directory would complain. It is a good idea to fix the relative paths.
The relativePaths will break if someone insists on checking out part
of the server and build, i.e. if one tries to build 'plugins' on an
empty repo without checking out 'framework' .
Thanks
Anita
[1]
http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-the-pom.html
--- David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> On Jan 10, 2008, at 11:33 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
>
> > On Jan 11, 2008 7:12 AM, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> >> After the reorganization into plugins most everything still has
> its
> >> old pom parent, either o.a.g.modules/modules or o.a.g.plugins/
> >> plugins. This seems to me like a bad idea.
> >
> > Could you elaborate on why this is a bad idea?
> >
>
> I guess we'd have to ask a maven expert for a real answer, I just
> have a feeling it will lead to trouble, but...
>
> currently a typical pom has
>
> <parent>
> <groupId>org.apache.geronimo.configs</groupId>
> <artifactId>configs</artifactId>
> <version>2.1-SNAPSHOT</version>
> <relativePath>../pom.xml</relativePath>
> </parent>
>
> <artifactId>j2ee-server</artifactId>
>
>
> The <relativePath> is just wrong. If we were to make it accurate it
>
> would be
>
> <parent>
> <groupId>org.apache.geronimo.configs</groupId>
> <artifactId>configs</artifactId>
> <version>2.1-SNAPSHOT</version>
> <relativePath>../../framework/configs/pom.xml</relativePath>
> </parent>
>
> <artifactId>j2ee-server</artifactId>
>
> I think this kind of cross-linking of projects will just lead to
> confusion and grief.
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
>
> > Jacek
> >
> > --
> > Jacek Laskowski
> > http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Re: Shouldn't subprojects use their file system parents as maven parents?
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
On Jan 10, 2008, at 11:33 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
> On Jan 11, 2008 7:12 AM, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> After the reorganization into plugins most everything still has its
>> old pom parent, either o.a.g.modules/modules or o.a.g.plugins/
>> plugins. This seems to me like a bad idea.
>
> Could you elaborate on why this is a bad idea?
>
I guess we'd have to ask a maven expert for a real answer, I just
have a feeling it will lead to trouble, but...
currently a typical pom has
<parent>
<groupId>org.apache.geronimo.configs</groupId>
<artifactId>configs</artifactId>
<version>2.1-SNAPSHOT</version>
<relativePath>../pom.xml</relativePath>
</parent>
<artifactId>j2ee-server</artifactId>
The <relativePath> is just wrong. If we were to make it accurate it
would be
<parent>
<groupId>org.apache.geronimo.configs</groupId>
<artifactId>configs</artifactId>
<version>2.1-SNAPSHOT</version>
<relativePath>../../framework/configs/pom.xml</relativePath>
</parent>
<artifactId>j2ee-server</artifactId>
I think this kind of cross-linking of projects will just lead to
confusion and grief.
thanks
david jencks
> Jacek
>
> --
> Jacek Laskowski
> http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl
Re: Shouldn't subprojects use their file system parents as maven parents?
Posted by Jacek Laskowski <ja...@laskowski.net.pl>.
On Jan 11, 2008 7:12 AM, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> After the reorganization into plugins most everything still has its
> old pom parent, either o.a.g.modules/modules or o.a.g.plugins/
> plugins. This seems to me like a bad idea.
Could you elaborate on why this is a bad idea?
Jacek
--
Jacek Laskowski
http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl