Cool thanks, I'll looking using the Apache parent pom and the apache-extras.
Darren > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Please choose: The build system to use for 4.0 > From: Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> > Date: Mon, August 20, 2012 12:47 am > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > > Nice stuff. (note you can have Apache pom as parent to inherit some > stuff and reduce pom size) > > In an other incubating project depending on jars not in maven central, > we have setup a m2 repo in apache-extras (see > http://svn.codespot.com/a/apache-extras.org/kalumet-extras/) > > -- > Olivier > > 2012/8/19 Darren Shepherd <dar...@godaddy.com>: > > All, > > > > So I have maven fully functional. I sent an email regarding this but > > being that it wasn't on this thread so it probably went un-noticed. So > > below is basically a copy of that. > > > > If you want to get an idea of what maven would look like for CS, what > > I've done is on the "maven" > > branch at https://github.com/ibuildthecloud/incubator-cloudstack.git > > > > I had to setup a custom repo to put all the non-oss libraries that don't > > exist in the central maven repo. To build just do "mvn -s > > m2-settings.xml" > > > > That settings file will create a local repo (not use ~/.m2/repository) > > because I was testing that all dependencies are coming from where I > > expected and not polluted by other maven stuff I do. > > > > Its a multi module project so you can do things like "mvn -s m2-settings > > -am -pl server" to just build the server portion (or core, or one of the > > tons of plugins). I also tested that the build works with maven 2 and > > maven 3 > > and that the Eclipse M2E plugin works with it too. > > > > I would love it if a maven god could review what I've done. If we're > > all good with maven I'll gladly take this to full completion and start > > submitting patches. Post 4.0 we can always improve (and I'm sure we > > will), but I feel I know what's the bare minimum need to get this out > > the door and I can do that (plus whatever nice to haves I can squeek > > in). > > > > Regarding the dev environment setup. We can do this with whatever > > little amount of impact we want. Once you have the maven pom's you just > > install Eclipse M2E (thats an eclipse foundation project) and then say > > "Import Existing Maven Projects" and then magic ensues. The M2E plugin > > works pretty darn well. It also has the great benefit that you can stop > > checking in .classpath and .project files in the your version control > > because the pom.xml has all the metadata Eclipse M2E needs to create a > > project. So my preferred approach would be to checkin the pom's and > > then delete the .classpath and .project files from git and have > > developers re-import their projects into eclipse. If people don't like > > that I can use some magic with the mvn depenendency:copy-dependencies to > > recreate the same structure as whats in deps today to make the eclipse > > projects still work. But I would grudgingly do that work as I would > > rather we just move forward with a standard maven layout. Gotta learn > > sometime and I don't think its all that difficult. > > > > Regarding the ant tasks, I want to keep backwards compatibilty so that > > the main ant tasks still work but just internally call maven and not > > javac/jar directly. > > > > So I vote we just let me do this and I'll get 'er done. > > > > Darren > > > > > > > >> -------- Original Message -------- > >> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Please choose: The build system to use for 4.0 > >> From: Ewan Mellor <ewan.mel...@eu.citrix.com> > >> Date: Fri, August 17, 2012 2:22 pm > >> To: "cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org" > >> <cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org> > >> > >> > >> Well, all our packages are going to be public, of course. That shouldn't > >> be a problem! > >> > >> Ewan. > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com] > >> > Sent: 17 August 2012 14:19 > >> > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > >> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Please choose: The build system to use for 4.0 > >> > > >> > I'm totally fine with a switch, my only concern was around when it's > >> > done. > >> > Aside from just implementing the build bits in the git repo (sounds like > >> > there > >> > are resources for this), I picture there being a bit of work on every > >> > developer's part to switch their dev environments. This might be as > >> > simple as > >> > a few package installs, but on at least one occasion when I was building > >> > something via Maven I had to spend the better part of an afternoon going > >> > back and forth with the network/systems guys because Maven needed to > >> > download some components and the applicable systems by default are > >> > internal-access only. It's things like that where I worry about > >> > switching build > >> > systems when people are under a crunch to complete 4.0. > >> > > >> > On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Ewan Mellor <ewan.mel...@eu.citrix.com> > >> > wrote: > >> > > OK, so we've got offers of effort on Maven from Darren, Hugo, plus > >> > > review > >> > help from Olivier and Alex. Maven gets +1 from me, Alex, and Brett too. > >> > > > >> > > On the Ant side we've got +1 from Chip ("based on timeline"), Wido, > >> > Marcus, and Mice. David has his deps-ctrl branch, but no-one has > >> > offered to > >> > finish the job. > >> > > > >> > > We have consensus that the release is going to slip by at least 3 > >> > > weeks (2 at > >> > the front and one at the end), which gives us four weeks total to get the > >> > build system done and debugged (i.e. between now and final release > >> > candidate on Sep 14). > >> > > > >> > > With that extra time, does that change anyone's opinion? It would be > >> > > nice > >> > to get consensus on this issue, otherwise we're going to have to put it > >> > to a > >> > vote. > >> > > > >> > > Thanks, > >> > > > >> > > Ewan. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> > >> From: akaras...@gmail.com [mailto:akaras...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of > >> > >> Alex Karasulu > >> > >> Sent: 17 August 2012 03:11 > >> > >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > >> > >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Please choose: The build system to use for 4.0 > >> > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> > >> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> > +1 for Apache Maven > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Ditto but this can happen any time and in parallel. I understand and > >> > >> appreciate the time limitations for the 4.0 release. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > (but I agree my POV can be considered non objective :-) > >> > >> > ) or at least our own Apache dogfood. > >> > >> > I agree this can late for 4.0 (why not for 4.1) Btw if someone push > >> > >> > poc on a branch I can help to review as I have a bit of experience > >> > >> > on (and Brett too :-) ). > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> I'm not a Maven demigod like Brett, but I can help out here as well. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Olivier > >> > >> > Le 16 août 2012 23:12, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> a écrit : > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > Hi folks, > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > I am particularly limiting the scope of this to what we do for > >> > >> > > 4.0, since that is the pressing timeline. > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > Here are the current options: > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > * Continue using ant, and have the hacky stuff I wrote as ant > >> > >> > > targets deal with dependency resolution. (see the differences in > >> > >> > > the deps-ctrl > >> > >> > > branch) > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > * Use Gradle (see the gradle branch) > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > * Use Maven (I haven't seen any of this, but Darren reports that > >> > >> > > he has this building - Darren: can we see this somewhere publicly > >> > >> > > perhaps?) > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > While I'd like to have us choose the system that we are going to > >> > >> > > use for all time (and despite some reservations, I think Maven is > >> > >> > > likely my personal choice for what we should move to long term), > >> > >> > > I am also concerned that we don't let the perfect become the enemy > >> > of the good. > >> > >> > > So given all of that - what should our choice be? > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > --David > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> > >> Best Regards, > >> > >> -- Alex > > > > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
