On 2016/03/15 16:34, Jiri B wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 12:56:22PM -0400, Bryan C. Everly wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have several maven-based projects that I'd like to create ports for, but > > our build process makes that challenging. > > > > Maven (for those who don't know) likes to download additional files as it > > compiles which is a non-starter for our build process. A solution that I > > have found to work around this is to run maven once, let it cache the files > > locally, turn them into a tarball which I then place in my "files" > > directory and make the real port run maven in offline mode from the cached > > files in the tarball. > > > > This process works, but it sure seems awkward. > > > > Does anyone have any suggestions on how I could make this better? > > Packaging java, ruby, node.js apps which many dependencies is nightmare > for everybody. IIRC Fedora must have for each dependency separate package > but I have heard recently that inside Fedora/RHEL thins are changing > and some projects are permitted to have one big package including all > its deps. The problem is - who and how will be those dependencies > maintained?
Yes this is a complete pain. I wanted to port oxidized (ruby) but it wants certain versions of deps which don't match versions in-tree and knowing the ecosystem it's highly likely that changing the deps will break something else using them.. > It doesn't answer your question. But it seems that if an app can be > installed via its own framework (npm, cabal, pip), some devs prefer > not to package it - at least I have the feeling about haskell, node.js > ports. pip/cpan things are usually sane enough to make into ports. Ruby is mixed. npm and go are pretty awkward, and it looks like maven is similarly awkward (though with the offline mode it seems less difficult than I thought it might be). btw, ian@ has been looking at maven recently.
