@Harbs. There is a branch already. If a big change has to be made it should go in the branch. A small breakage I can fix in an hour doesn't have to.
@Josh. I can't make you do anything, but really, if you are the PMC and want to have us use some product, you really should sign up to learn about that product. Chris has threatened to quit the project several times already, and if someday he does, where would that leave us? This isn't a corporate sponsored project where we can just hire another Maven expert. And what if you want to add some cool new different type of module some day? We need to use technology that everyone can modify. We can't all assume we can just be "users". @Chris. I am not claiming to be a Maven expert. I am just noting that the multi-target with alternate dependency chains has been hardest part, and I found some internet articles about how that can be difficult for Maven. I am sorry that Mavenizing flex-falcon and especially flex-asjs has turned out to be harder than you expected, but I don't see why we can't use Ant for the things that are hard, at least for now. Insulting me and the code base doesn't feel like collaboration. Yes, it has issues, but some things can be fixed without having to go to Maven. Saying you had a problem with the Ant build and thus the whole thing is un-maintainable doesn't feel collaborative either. Posting the log of a failed Ant build and asking for help so we can put more fault tolerance into the Ant script is collaborative. I expect that once we get the Maven build mostly working, if someone tries it and it fails, they will not call for dropping Maven and going back to Ant. I don't think this project needs to legislate which build tools we use. If someone shows up and wants to use Node to get the pieces, that's fine with me as long as it doesn't break the other builds. Maven artifacts for our customers are the big goal here, so I am willing to modify the repo and Ant builds to make Maven work, but so is developer productivity, approachability of our code and maintainability of our build systems, all by volunteers working in their spare time. It is a bad sign if there is one expert who is responsible for something. Using only Maven to make Maven artifacts is a secondary goal, IMO. Feel free to fill up another email with venting if it makes you feel better, then let's get back to talking about technical stuff. Sometimes, I think you may not be seeing all of my emails. I have mentioned up thread that problems you are having point to not using the right compilers and options, not some magic in the build system, and tried several times to draw with words what the formula is, but I haven't seen actual questions related to my answers. And I've asked twice already: would having a parallel set of projects in an "externs" folder help or not? Maybe I will just do it so you can see what I really mean. ApacheCon is right around the corner. I have my train tickets for Wednesday and maybe we can actually draw sketches when we meet up and get past this current issue. If you decide not to continue, let me know and I will cancel my tickets. -Alex On 5/5/16, 2:39 PM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >So maybe it’s time to do the work on asjs in a separate maven branch? >That way you don’t have to worry if something is broken while you pull >things apart. > >On May 5, 2016, at 11:37 PM, Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> >wrote: > >> >> The problem with finishing the maven stuff for the ASJS part is that I >>am trying to bring to paper how the parts fit together. Now it's hard >>but not impossible to sketch how one module is built ... that's why I >>seem to have managed to have "Core" build, but it starts getting insane >>as soon as you try to build something that relies on "Core". In order to >>finish this, we need to clean this mess up and that's where I'm stuck, >>cause I cant do this without breaking things. >> >> Chris >> ________________________________________ >> Von: omup...@gmail.com <omup...@gmail.com> im Auftrag von OmPrakash >>Muppirala <bigosma...@gmail.com> >> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 5. Mai 2016 21:00:23 >> An: dev@flex.apache.org >> Betreff: Re: [FALCON] Code analysis stats for Falcon >> >> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 3:32 AM, Christofer Dutz >><christofer.d...@c-ware.de> >> wrote: >> >>> To me it feels like I'm the only one actually wanting to go to Maven >>>:-( >>> >> >> You can always set up a poll to gauge interest. It is a good way to see >> what the community wants. Also, in the end, it is your personal choice >>to >> work on this or not. >> >> Personally, I am waiting for you to finish the maven integration so I >>can >> start using it. Unfortunately, I don't have a lot of time to spare to >> actually help you with coding this stuff. But you know that I try my >>best >> to help you with testing your stuff. >> >> Thanks, >> Om >> >> >>> >>> I'm even thinking about dropping the ball on this entirely, cause I >>>don't >>> want to be the only one complaining about the status quo. It was an >>>insane >>> amount of work to get falcon to build with Maven. I invested far nite >>>time >>> than I actually had. All I am hearing is that I'm making things more >>> complicated. If everyone is happy with Ant and it's the overall >>>impression >>> I'm making things more complicated with Maven, I better invest my time >>>in >>> other projects. >>> >>> Chris >>> >>> >>> Von meinem Samsung Galaxy Smartphone gesendet. >>> >>> >>> -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -------- >>> Von: Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> >>> Datum: 05.05.16 11:54 (GMT+01:00) >>> An: dev@flex.apache.org >>> Betreff: Re: [FALCON] Code analysis stats for Falcon >>> >>> Got it. >>> >>> Once you have the Maven build working, it would be great to see what it >>> does with asjs. Who knows. Maybe we’ll be lucky… ;-) >>> >>> On May 5, 2016, at 12:32 PM, Christofer Dutz >>><christofer.d...@c-ware.de> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Actually it does support ActionScript. But unfortunately I need to >>>>build >>> with Maven fire that and I doubt it will be able to understand the >>>flexjs >>> code with all these define blocks >>>> >>>> Chris >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Von meinem Samsung Galaxy Smartphone gesendet. >>>> >>>> >>>> -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -------- >>>> Von: Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> >>>> Datum: 05.05.16 11:02 (GMT+01:00) >>>> An: dev@flex.apache.org >>>> Betreff: Re: [FALCON] Code analysis stats for Falcon >>>> >>>> Wow. That’s really nice. Seems like it’s very useful! >>>> >>>> Does this only work for Java, or can it be configured for other >>> languages (such as ActionScript)? >>>> >>>> Harbs >>>> >>>> On May 5, 2016, at 11:35 AM, Christofer Dutz >>>><christofer.d...@c-ware.de> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I just turned on public access to my SonarQube server ... there you >>>>>can >>> see an up-to-date code analysis report for Falcon and FalconJX. It >>>clearly >>> points out the Null Pointer hot spots. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://dev.c-ware.de:10000/overview?id=2471 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps looking into this every now and then could help improving >>> code-quality, stability and resillience of our software. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Chris >>>> >>> >>> >
