New Contributor Introduction & Initial Proposal for Contribution
Fellow Developers, I am new to this group, and I wanted to take a moment to introduce myself. I have been a Java developer since 2001, and an open source advocate since the mid-90s. It would be an honor to volunteer a part of my time to work on several Apache projects which I have found to be vital to my career. Therefore, today, 10/12/2007, I faxed my signed Contributor License Agreement to the Apache Software Foundation. I will be continuing my adventure through the "New Contributor" sections of the Apache site, and would like to get acquainted with contributing to the Tomcat project, first and foremost. I humbly request any help that any of you may be able to provide, and I ask that you to bear with me while I attempt to get my feet wet here. With that being said, I eagerly checked-out the source code and followed the BUILDING.txt file's instructions. Unfortunately, my build is failing due to dependency issues. Therefore, at first glance, I realized that one of the first things that I would love to contribute is the full Mavenization (M10N) of the Tomcat build process. Please let me know if this is already in discussion. If it is not, please let me know how I may proceed. I look forward to working with all of you. Sincerely, Paul Shemansky
Re: New Contributor Introduction & Initial Proposal for Contribution
Hi Filip,
Thank you for your guidance.
I resolved my build issues. According to the BUILDING.txt, you need a
1.5.x"or later" JDK, and I was using a
1.6.x JDK. Although the build properties are set to compile using 1.5, the
build still seems to break on 1.6. Perhaps we should investigate building
on 1.6.x more, and/or update the BUILDING.txt to clarify this.
The build also could not find the JDT zip file mentioned in the build
properties :
http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/eclipse/downloads/drops/R-3.2.2-200702121330/eclipse-JDT-3.2.2.zip
Perhaps their site is just down at the time I am building, or it needs to be
updated.
I switched it to use the ibiblio mirror site, which in my opinion is
probably more stable :
http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/eclipse/downloads/drops/R-3.2.2-200702121330/eclipse-JDT-3.2.2.zip
I have attached a patch to make this switch.
Most of my Maven 2 experiences have been favorable over Ant, and I will
attempt a Maven Evangelism email thread soon.
Thank You,
Paul
On 10/12/07, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi Paul, welcome!
>
> It's good news and we always welcome new ideas and new contributions.
>
> Let me address your building issue first, building is quite easy.
>
> Requirements: ant, java 1.5
>
> 1. check out SVN directory
> svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk
>
> 2. download deps
> cd trunk
> ant download
>
> 3. build
> ant
>
> The question about maven has been around, last time it was brought up
> the community wasn't too keen on it, the ant is so simple and easy to
> maintain. I've seen other projects always spend vast amount of times
> just trying to get their maven stuff to work, we've never really had
> that problem with ant. It's simply too simple to screw up :)
> What I would do, is start an email thread where you poll the interest
> for such contribution before you spend the time on it.
>
> In terms of contribution, everyone pretty much works on the area of
> their own interest.
> A good place to start is the bug database, and submit patches to the
> bugzilla database.
> for example
>
> http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?query_format=specific&order=relevance+desc&bug_status=__open__&product=Tomcat+6&content=
>
> have fun digging around, just let us know if you need more help
>
> Filip
>
> Paul Shemansky wrote:
> > Fellow Developers,
> >
> > I am new to this group, and I wanted to take a moment to introduce
> myself. I
> > have been a Java developer since 2001, and an open source advocate since
> the
> > mid-90s. It would be an honor to volunteer a part of my time to work on
> > several Apache projects which I have found to be vital to my career.
> > Therefore, today, 10/12/2007, I faxed my signed Contributor License
> > Agreement to the Apache Software Foundation.
> >
> > I will be continuing my adventure through the "New Contributor" sections
> of
> > the Apache site, and would like to get acquainted with contributing to
> the
> > Tomcat project, first and foremost. I humbly request any help that any
> of
> > you may be able to provide, and I ask that you to bear with me while I
> > attempt to get my feet wet here.
> >
> > With that being said, I eagerly checked-out the source code and followed
> the
> > BUILDING.txt file's instructions. Unfortunately, my build is failing due
> to
> > dependency issues. Therefore, at first glance, I realized that one of
> the
> > first things that I would love to contribute is the full Mavenization
> (M10N)
> > of the Tomcat build process. Please let me know if this is already in
> > discussion. If it is not, please let me know how I may proceed.
> >
> > I look forward to working with all of you.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Paul Shemansky
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1064 - Release Date:
> 10/11/2007 3:09 PM
> >
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
Index: build.properties.default
===
--- build.properties.default(revision 584262)
+++ build.properties.default(working copy)
@@ -57,7 +57,7 @@
jdt.home=${base.path}/eclipse/plugins
jdt.lib=${jdt.home}
jdt.jar=${jdt.lib}/org.eclipse.jdt.core_3.2.3.v_686_R32x.jar
-jdt.loc=htt
Re: Tomcat6 BUILDING.txt misunderstood?
My Fellow Code Monkeys, You may have noticed I recommended for a push to change the build to a Maven 2 structure. Before starting a Mavenization discussion thread, I wanted to investigate the entire build process. My first day here, I noticed that we are downloading DBCP source files and compiling them with the Tomcat build. In my humble opinion, I think it would be nice to just include a reference to a working version of the DBCP as a Maven dependency. As I am still getting acquainted here, I have tried to refrain from rocking the boat, but, why do we tie ourselves to a build process of another completely separate and JDK-dependent project? Tomcat and DBCP should be built separately, and Tomcat should probably use the pre-built, fully-tested DBCP jar file. If I am missing something, please forgive and educate this poor Tomcat Newbie. I hereby re-announce my willingness to volunteer efforts towards the the true Mavenization of the Tomcat build. Should we take a vote on this? As a proof-of-concept, may I start a Maven2-managed SVN branch somehow? Sincerely, Paul Shemansky Maven 2 Evangelist On 10/17/07, Rémy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-10-17 at 08:41 -0400, Yoav Shapira wrote: > > Hi DI, > > > > On 10/17/07, DI Roman Fiedler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > If misunderstood: Change line to > > >Download a Java Development Kit (JDK) release (version 1.5.x) from: > > > > > > If error: > > > search for it? > > > > It's an error: the build is intended to work with Java 1.5 and later, > > including Java 1.6, but it doesn't right now. It's our fault and > > we're working on fixing it. Sorry about that ;) > > It's impossible to predict if it will work with newer versions. It's > supposed to, but Sun likes to break the JDBC interfaces on each major > upgrade :( > > Rémy > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
Re: Tomcat6 BUILDING.txt misunderstood?
On 10/17/07, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Paul Shemansky wrote: > > My Fellow Code Monkeys, . > > My first day here, I noticed that we > > are downloading DBCP source files and compiling them with the Tomcat build. > > In my humble opinion, I think it would be nice to just include a reference > > to a working version of the DBCP as a Maven dependency. > we are not only downloading the source files, we are refactoring them > before compilation as well. > we are changing the package name to org.apache.tomcat.dbcp so that > webapps that include commons-dbcp don't cause problems Thank you for enlightening me. That makes more sense now. I still believe there is room for improvements, though. And I am eagerly studying and looking to make some. > > Should we take a vote on this? As a proof-of-concept, may I start a > > Maven2-managed SVN branch somehow? > > > do a poll, but in a separate thread, so that people are clear on what > you are asking them. I agree. I will start one shortly. Thank You. > > Filip > > Sincerely, > > Paul Shemansky > > Maven 2 Evangelist > > > > > > > > On 10/17/07, Rémy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 2007-10-17 at 08:41 -0400, Yoav Shapira wrote: > >> > >>> Hi DI, > >>> > >>> On 10/17/07, DI Roman Fiedler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> If misunderstood: Change line to > >>>>Download a Java Development Kit (JDK) release (version 1.5.x) from: > >>>> > >>>> If error: > >>>> search for it? > >>>> > >>> It's an error: the build is intended to work with Java 1.5 and later, > >>> including Java 1.6, but it doesn't right now. It's our fault and > >>> we're working on fixing it. Sorry about that ;) > >>> > >> It's impossible to predict if it will work with newer versions. It's > >> supposed to, but Sun likes to break the JDBC interfaces on each major > >> upgrade :( > >> > >> Rémy > >> > >> > >> > >> - > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.13/1074 - Release Date: > > 10/16/2007 2:14 PM > > > > > - > 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]
Mavenization (M10N) of Tomcat Build Process - Should Tomcat Be Migrated to Maven 2?
Dear Fellow Tomcat Developers, As you may have already noticed, I recently joined the ASF and the Tomcat Developer's List. I have been a Maven 2 user since 2005, and I previously used Ant for all of my projects. I suffered through many hardships migrating from Ant to Maven, but in my humble opinion, it was well worth it. I believe that the Tomcat build can certainly benefit from some of the key features of Maven 2 mentioned below. It is not my intention to start a flame war between Ant and Maven users, but merely to propose Maven 2 to this group, and respectfully use this thread to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of switching Tomcat's build process within the 6.0.x or possibly 7.0 release schedule. Please use this thread to voice your opinion. Reply to this message with any comments, and/or simple votes for or against the migration to Maven 2. If by some odd chance you have never seen or heard about Maven 2, please visit and explore : http://maven.apache.org/ Key features that may be useful to us are : - The Standard Directory Layout - Specifically, multi-module builds. This might make managing individual components easier for catalina, coyote, naming, jsp/servlet api/implementation, connector, etc. - Model-Based builds - Automatic packaging for the individual modules. - Dependency Management - Whether it is Apache or another third-party, dependencies can all easily be plugged in. - Distribution Management - Packaging and Deployment - Although Tomcat has a structured distribution model with Ant, Maven could make this easier with its assembly plugin. This also allows outside entities to easily embed specific Tomcat components or customize the server to suit their needs, (i.e. containers like Geronimo and JBoss, IDE plugins for Eclipse or Tomcat.) - Project Site and Report Generation. - The Tomcat documentation site may benefit greatly, but the Maven reporting plugins seem to be the bigger win here. As a new ASF / Tomcat contributor, I am hesitant to step on toes. But, I vote that we eat the dog food. This migration would certainly be something that I could dedicate myself to, and I believe I could make the transition seamless for all of us. I look forward to hearing from you. Whether you vote Yes or No, I am still happy to be working with you. :) Thank You, Paul Shemansky Maven 2 Evangelist / Open-Source Advocate / Java Code-Monkey P.S. - Maven has also been covered by the last few issues of JDJ, which has certainly given it a lot more public exposure lately : http://java.sys-con.com/read/393300.htm http://java.sys-con.com/read/400116.htm http://java.sys-con.com/read/419727.htm - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mavenization (M10N) of Tomcat Build Process - Should Tomcat Be Migrated to Maven 2?
Remy, do you think that it would be acceptable as a test branch (proving ground), a possible integration into a near-future release, or do you believe that Maven is just not acceptable at all for Tomcat? On 10/17/07, Rémy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 2007-10-17 at 16:21 -0400, Paul Shemansky wrote: > > It is not my intention to start a flame war between Ant and Maven > > users, but merely to propose Maven 2 to this group, and respectfully > > use this thread to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of > > switching Tomcat's build process within the 6.0.x or possibly 7.0 > > release schedule. > > I don't think this work is acceptable in 6.0.x. > > Rémy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mavenization (M10N) of Tomcat Build Process - Should Tomcat Be Migrated to Maven 2?
On 10/17/07, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > to elaborate more for you, 6.0.x is our current 6.0 release branch. > We are using RTC, Review-Then-Commit policy here, and introducing maven > into a stable release branch like this, is probably not the best idea. > What you should focus your proposal on, is our "trunk" that doesn't yet > exist. Once we have a trunk, ideas and contributions get discussed and > added there, then they can be suggested for a back port. > > At this moment, we don't have a trunk, but you can assume that there > will be one Indeed, I could see this transition becoming the proposed trunk, provided it is actually practical for Tomcat and every developer actually agreed upon the Maven migration or integration, which by glancing at the posts seems it may be unlikely :) Do you anticipate a trunk version, possibly with no further modifications to backports? If so, is there a 7.0/trunk release plan that I somehow missed? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mavenization (M10N) of Tomcat Build Process - Should Tomcat Be Migrated to Maven 2?
If nothing else comes out of this discussion thread, we will at least hear build-process opinions from above-average developers. Thank you in advance to all that reply. In response to Filip : On 10/17/07, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > lemme give you my feedback and some history I sincerely appreciate feedback and history. Additionally, thank you for caring. :) > we just refactored everything from being "component/module" based into a > single source tree. > Everyone at the time agreed that it would make life easier, for me > personally, it was a huge improvement. I was unaware of the prior unification process, and I thought I noticed a sense of frustration :) Perhaps modularizing is not one of the features that we need then. Seeing as I am still new here, I am unaware of any current component delegation (i.e. John Smith works on catalina-ha only, Jane Doe works on jasper only). I have had to assume that all active developers just simply work on every single component in the project. In other projects that I have worked on, a clear separation of responsibility is vital to success and a more prosperous growth. > > - Model-Based builds - Automatic packaging for the individual modules. > not sure what this is, even though we have a single source tree, we do > generate a list of jars. This would not have to be an all-or-nothing separation. But, if a component is just an API, the packaging model is a JAR; the current webapp models and future webapp modules could even package as WARs. If everyone did in fact agree to modularize the separate components as mentioned above, each component would be responsible for its own packaging process instead of managing all packaging and distribution within the single build/dist files. In many cases I have found this to be a great feature. Of course, in others, it can be a nightmare. If Tomcat was modularized and failed as such, I will respect the single source tree. > > - Dependency Management - Whether it is Apache or another third-party, > > dependencies can all easily be plugged in. > > > we do that today, crude but working, ANT just adopted Ivy, a dependency > manager for ANT. I was unaware of the ASF adoption of Ivy 2.0. If it is, as you say, 'crude', why was it adopted? I thought Ivy was just drowning in the wake of Maven 2, but it seems to have more features than when I first evaluated it. Thank you for the heads up; I will be keeping an eye on it. > > - Distribution Management - Packaging and Deployment - Although Tomcat > > has a structured distribution model with Ant, Maven could make this > > easier with its assembly plugin. > > > We currently have a "distribute to Maven repo" in place. > The most current version is in the sandbox, that would allow us to > publish to the central ASF repo with signed JAR's. > This allows(will allow) other projects that do use Maven, to integrate > tomcat into their system. > You can glance over it here > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/sandbox/gdev6x/res/maven/ While reviewing the project structure I did in fact notice that you added the poms there. I assumed that this was just an orphaned process because the 6.0.14 files did not publish to the main repository at : http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/tomcat/. I am clearly unaware of the distribution schedule, and I apologize for my confusion. > So, speaking for myself, I have yet not seen a benefit of Maven over our > current ANT build. And I wouldn't be up for eating dog food. > water and cracker, although simple, have sustained us very long. I am typically a big supporter of the KISS Principal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle), too. Of course, I also believe that this principle, when applied to IT, often marries itself to a resistance-to-change. I agree that Maven does not in fact suit every build, and, if done wrong, it can be detrimental to the health of a programmer. If 20 active developers know and prefer Ant, and 1 knows and prefers Mavenwell, I am going to promote Ant all the way. The purpose here was solely to generate some feedback. Both Ant and Maven will surely be around for awhile, but it is only right to give each a fair chance to excel at whatever each is good at. > I'd vote against the proposal, maybe cause I'm just getting to old to > spend hours with Maven, but you should collect feedback from the others > as well, and maybe there is a majority one way or the other. You are only old if you admit to yourself that you are old. Again, whether the votes come in as a +1 or -1, I am honored to have an opportunity to work with you. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mavenization (M10N) of Tomcat Build Process - Should Tomcat Be Migrated to Maven 2?
On 10/17/07, Costin Manolache <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But if you want to create a maven build file ( or a Makefile, or > eclipse/netbeans projects, etc :-) that builds tomcat - I personally don't > see a problem with that - as long as it doesn't require moving code around > and can play nicely with the current code layout and other build tools. I > think the 'official' way to build tomcat should remain ant ( at least until > any potential replacement has a large mileage ), but having other alternate > build tools can't hurt. I apologize if I made this discussion seem like an all-or-nothing dictatorship. This effort could be a huge all-at-once change, or a gradual migration towards Maven. The two can also co-exist well together, accommodating both Maven and Ant users. I hereby encourage all developers not only to vote +1 or -1, but also offer why they feel that way. If you feel it should be a +1, but have some reservations as to "how" it is to be done, by all means share that too. If you're thinking "+1, but only if _ .", please let everyone know instead of voting -1. > I'm quite happy using mostly eclipse - I hardly ever use ant ( mostly to > generate jars and move code around ), the auto-recompilation and fast > run/debug/hot-replace in eclipse are saving me a lot of time, but if > something faster emerges I'll try it. > Costin > -1 I suppose many of us use eclipse, and any disparate build process in many ways hinders that comfy, rapid IDE development we prefer to enjoy. I agree that the automation the IDE provides is vital to development, and have found many ways to keep Maven in line with that. Would you vote +1 for a slightly more refined co-existence with Maven 2 rather than a blatant full-replacement? Would you vote +1 for full-replacement provided it gives you unhindered, Eclipse-friendly flexibility? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mavenization (M10N) of Tomcat Build Process - Should Tomcat Be Migrated to Maven 2?
On 10/17/07, Mark Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Paul Shemansky wrote: > > Key features that may be useful to us are : > > > > - The Standard Directory Layout - Specifically, multi-module builds. > > This might make managing individual components easier for catalina, > > coyote, naming, jsp/servlet api/implementation, connector, etc. > > "might" isn't a compelling argument. I agree that "might" is too passive. However, by saying "will", I immediately seem aggressive, paint myself into a corner, prepare for a Maven vs. Ant flame war, and wind up with no choice but to shoot myself in the face :) It "would" make things easier if each of the components were being managed by separate, designated groups of developers. I am now aware that this is not the case for Tomcat, but I am still motivated to promote 'slight' layout modifications which may make any potential new developers feel right at home the day they sign on : _ Hello Mark, our project uses this layout : http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-the-standard-directory-layout.html _ Of course, if that is not appealing to anyone, we could just create documentation on how the current version is structured, leaving nothing to the imagination. If the Maven layout is shot down, I would still be willing to help with writing more extensive documentation of Tomcat's directory structure and build process. Before I attempt to contribute any real code, I feel it is vital to become heavily aware of the build. > > - Model-Based builds - Automatic packaging for the individual modules. > > Our build script does this. I didn't say that it didn't. The current build process is not flawed; It works very well. This was only to state that "if" we decided to modularize, packaging would be a more automated feature which is wrapped in the definition (pom.xml) of each module, rather than being intertwined into a single large sequential build file. > > > - Dependency Management - Whether it is Apache or another third-party, > > dependencies can all easily be plugged in. > > There are only a few and they are easily managed with the current > build process. Again, this is not an attack against the current build process. Ant is not my enemy. I am simply proposing that Maven can provide improvements over how dependencies are managed, now and in the future. Perhaps as Filip mentioned, Ivy will accommodate all of the dependency management via Ant. I was simply stating that dependency management is built into Maven, along with a few other features which IMHO 'may' be nice for the Tomcat build. As a new programmer to Tomcat, I feel it would have been nice to see a dependency list or report 'before' I actually built the project, without having to read too much into the build.xml. Dependencies are also currently downloaded into a project-defined directory. This is opposed to simply being declared in the build as dependencies and managed in a local Maven repository which houses dependencies in a clearly defined, unified directory layout. In a perfect world, we would not need to store more than one copy of any of the Commons JAR files on our machines. IMHO, I think that Maven 2 does in fact help to promote this. I am still exploring the current Tomcat build, and again, I apologize for not being here long enough to know every single thing about the dependencies involved. Filip cleared up my initial dependency (DBCP) issue (thanks again). But, can anyone tell me why we are downloading the tomcat-native zip file from the archive url when it seems that it is already part of the initial Tomcat check-out under the "native" directory? Is this a dependency, or part of the project already? > > > - Distribution Management - Packaging and Deployment - Although Tomcat > > has a structured distribution model with Ant, Maven could make this > > easier with its assembly plugin. This also allows outside entities to > > easily embed specific Tomcat components or customize the server to > > suit their needs, (i.e. containers like Geronimo and JBoss, IDE > > plugins for Eclipse or Tomcat.) > > Easier how? Filip, mentioned that he added the poms to the project so that the individual dependencies may be publicly distributed into the main Maven repository. This, if maintained, can allow any outside vendor to quickly download all of the latest 'required' components of Tomcat into their own Maven (or Ant w/ Maven Tasks ;) build process. They could easily wrap anything they want around the web container simply by including Tomcat as a dependency. This can be attractive, especially from a software consulting perspective, in which I may want to have a web appli
Re: Mavenization (M10N) of Tomcat Build Process - Should Tomcat Be Migrated to Maven 2?
Hi Yoav, > On 10/19/07, Yoav Shapira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 10/19/07, Paul Shemansky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm going to keep waiting for more a few more +1s in the > > "as-an-alternate" category before doing any real work on it. > Speaking only for myself, I don't see how waiting helps anything. I'm > +0 to you (or anyone else) doing the work and showing us a working > Maven build. I'm -0 to committing to a build system idea before I see > its implementation. It's just like most other issues or enhancement > requests: I'm always open to new ideas but I want to see the proof in > the pudding, so to speak. If I commit to working on it, and try to show some sort of proof-in-the-pudding, the issue returns to the problem I mentioned before which is hosting it. I had originally mentioned the idea of opening a branch for it. However, I don't have commit access to the ASF repository, yet, and I felt too new to be asking for it. Since I have made everyone aware that I would do the work, and the overwhelming consensus seems to be "integrate-instead-of-migrate", I'm ready to start prototyping in my spare time. Would you grant me access to commit the finished prototype if turns out to be good pudding? > And that's coming from someone who used Maven for his day job the past > couple of years, so is not a Maven opponent. Since you use it regularly, how do you personally feel about it? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mavenization (M10N) of Tomcat Build Process - Should Tomcat Be Migrated to Maven 2?
John, On 10/18/07, jkew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Paul, > I agree with Costin. > -1 to default Default is out of the question. > +1 to alternative I'm going to keep waiting for more a few more +1s in the "as-an-alternate" category before doing any real work on it. > > Some points: > > 1. I would be a willing tester. Thank you. > 2. Please make sure versions are put on every plugin / dependency. Probably. > 3. I have a love/hate relationship with maven. It sort of scares me. > Debugging maven hurts. Debugging anything hurts. :) > 4. On the positive side, I like that a pom file is usually short and > easy to understand. In most cases, I agree. Unfortunately, I can make lengthy Maven poms, too. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mavenization (M10N) of Tomcat Build Process - Should Tomcat Be Migrated to Maven 2?
William, FYI - I love Gentoo. On 10/18/07, William L. Thomson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gentoo's vote -1 for Tomcat using Maven to build instead of Ant :) > > On Wed, 2007-10-17 at 23:26 -0700, Bill Barker wrote: > > I'm pretty much going to agree with Costin on this one. I have no objection > > to having a maven build as an alternative to the ant build (assuming that it > > can do the same thing, which I don't really believe without seeing the pom). > > Only way I would be some what open to it is if the ant build system > remained and maven was offered as an alternative. But maven only, no > way. Alternative, doesn't matter, keeps all happy, but is it worth the > dev time? I think it is safe to assume that Ant is pretty much no longer on the table for being replaced anytime soon. As far as your issues with packaging Maven in Gentoo, I wish you the best of luck. I think we're still waiting for more +1 votes to see if it is worth the dev time. Only time will tell. At this point I don't think I'm gonna hold my breath. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [LOBBYING] Add nio connector to configuration validation
For what it's worth :) +1 On 10/19/07, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ok, sending a little email to lobby for a useful change. To the contrary > of comments and vetoes to this change, it doesn't change existing > behavior, it simplifies it, and also adds the NIO connector to the > validation of server.xml attributes. > > It'd be nice to get one more vote, so that we can get it in before the tag. > > From STATUS > * Make server.xml parsing warnings more generic, add support for the NIO > connector > * Connector is no longer an exception case. Any new component can still > use setProperty and return a boolean > * to accept or reject the property > http://people.apache.org/~fhanik/patches/digester-attribute-warnings.patch > > > Filip > > - > 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]
Re: Mavenization (M10N) of Tomcat Build Process - Should Tomcat Be Migrated to Maven 2?
Bill, The last thing that I want to be responsible for is introducing a stumbling block for all of the Tomcat developers and users. This thread should have also included "Maven 2 - Migrate, Integrate, or Annihilate". On 10/18/07, Bill Barker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm pretty much going to agree with Costin on this one. I have no objection > to having a maven build as an alternative to the ant build (assuming that it > can do the same thing, which I don't really believe without seeing the pom). I agree, "replacement" is no longer an option at this point - perhaps in the distant future. > But most mavenized projects that I have see (e.g. apache-commons) seem to > spend much more time on the pom then on the actual module code. FYI - I love writing code, and honestly I don't like being tied to build processes. :) However, I feel that Maven 2 is finally coming to fruition and believe it would be nice to incorporate it. > And most of the look-feel of mavenized project's websites frankly s*ck. I agree, but most of those sites do not even attempt to add style to the default generated site. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder (and is in the hands of the CSS writer). If desired, the generated Maven site wouldn't even have to replace the current site, but could serve as an addition to the current site. > Personally, I consider maven to be a virus (downloading files onto my > computer without my permission). With Maven 2, dependencies are all downloaded into your local repository, and they seem to be more organized than most other builds which mimic this process. The current Ant build downloads dependencies without permission, too. Maven shouldn't be any scarier. > M1 is difficult to configure to always run > offline, and M2 is close to impossible. It is difficult to believe that any developer is usually working offline. To me, this is like taking out the Starbucks or Dunkin'-Donuts coffee drip-line which is attached to my veins. However, I have not had too many problems with building offline, unless I don't already have the dependency in my repository. Maven's "-Doffline=true" command-line option works well for me. > > "Costin Manolache" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -1 as well on switching to maven as default ( or back to many source tree > > 'modules' ). Maven would not be the default, but running "mvn" or "ant" from the base directory would both be possible. Many source tree modules is out the window, at least for now. > > But if you want to create a maven build file ( or a Makefile, or > > eclipse/netbeans projects, etc :-) that builds tomcat - I personally don't > > see a problem with that - as long as it doesn't require moving code around Moving code would be minimal, if any. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mavenization (M10N) of Tomcat Build Process - Should Tomcat Be Migrated to Maven 2?
On 10/18/07, Mary Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi guys, > i have been a passive listener all the while but i feel its time for change. > I vote for Maven > regards, > Mary Thank you, Mary. However, I believe we are out-numbered. :) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mavenization (M10N) of Tomcat Build Process - Should Tomcat Be Migrated to Maven 2?
On 10/18/07, Peter Rossbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes! > > I can't see that maven build is better choice. > > Peter > > Vote -1 for build with maven! What if Maven 2 is added in co-existence, instead of as a replacement? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mavenization (M10N) of Tomcat Build Process - Should Tomcat Be Migrated to Maven 2?
On 10/17/07, Konstantin Kolinko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, Paul! > You may start playing in some sandbox, creating a directory structure > there, and pulling branches of tomcat code through the use of > svn:externals property. It is called creating a view. Thanks Konstantin, I agree with the svn:externals setup, and can easily start putting together a proof-of-concept. However, since I still retain a "newbie" status, I have no way to show it to anyone here, other than hosting it myself. I am ambitious, but until I see a clear acceptance, approval, and direction of this effort, I am inclined to hold off. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PROPOSAL] - Catalina Ant JMX?
While browsing the project, I noticed that there is an unused separation of Catalina Ant JMX resources. If this was unintended, a possible cleanup patch is attached. Index: java/org/apache/catalina/ant/jmx/JMXAccessorEqualsCondition.java === --- java/org/apache/catalina/ant/jmx/JMXAccessorEqualsCondition.java (revision 587502) +++ java/org/apache/catalina/ant/jmx/JMXAccessorEqualsCondition.java (working copy) @@ -34,7 +34,6 @@ ** * Index: java/org/apache/catalina/ant/jmx/JMXAccessorCondition.java === --- java/org/apache/catalina/ant/jmx/JMXAccessorCondition.java (revision 587502) +++ java/org/apache/catalina/ant/jmx/JMXAccessorCondition.java (working copy) @@ -34,7 +34,6 @@ ** *- * * * * Index: build.xml === --- build.xml (revision 587502) +++ build.xml (working copy) @@ -63,7 +63,6 @@ - Index: dist.xml === --- dist.xml(revision 587502) +++ dist.xml(working copy) @@ -66,7 +66,6 @@ - Index: extras.xml === --- extras.xml (revision 587502) +++ extras.xml (working copy) @@ -63,7 +63,6 @@ - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]* *- * *
