Jose Alberto Fernandez a écrit :
I think that it will be a very good idea, mostly as a stepping stone to
higher level functionality.
The main reason for not having such a thing is the fact that each
project knows in advance what kind of repository is being in used. So
why do we need something abstract?
On the other hand, once you have such an abstracted functionality, I am
sure we could envision higher level tasks stored on other antlibs that
may provide project management style functionality irrespective of the
underlying repository. That would be a very good thing to have.
So I am all for it. The question is what are the concepts that can be
ported across all different SCMs?
In Maven-SCM, we have some abstract beans for each commands (checkout, checkin, update,
changelog...) in an abstract api, Each provider implement these beans for obtain an
accessible command in framework for this provider.
We support actually clearcase, cvs, local, perforce, starteam and in few weeks, Serena
Dimension (PVCS).
I think it will be great if we can contribute together to it.
Maven-SCM is totally independant of an other framework, so it can simply be used in ant,
maven, continuum, standalone app...
We actually use it in maven1, maven2 and continuum
Emmanuel
As per syntax, I would much prefer something like:
<scm:commit ...../>
Now, can this be done in such a way as to figure out by itself what is
the underlying repository is. That would limit the need for magic stuff.
Jose Alberto
-----Original Message-----
From: Kev Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 27 September 2005 07:34
To: Ant Developers List
Subject: suggestion refactor SCM
Hi
I've been playing with darcs recently and I've almost finished an
antlib
for it (though I keep being distracted, first Haskell, now Lisp....).
'darcs get' is roughly similar to 'cvs checkout' or 'svn co'
I was wondering if it would make sense to refactor the SCM tasks into
an
interface (scm) and have a set of antlibs that implement that
interface
in a vendor specific manner. Such that
<scm command="commit">
is handled appropriately by each SCM system in it's own way, whilst at
the same time exposing a common API to simplify this (very common) set
of tasks. I'm thinking it'd be similar to how the <javac> task
simplifies compiling regardless of which compiler you want to use.
Is this:
a - a stupid idea and a colossal waste of time
b - a not too stupid idea, but still a colossal waste of time
c - not stupid, a colossal waste of time, but it'd be worth doing
anyway
d - none of the above
Kev
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
