Mavenizing Tomcat : Was: Osgifing Tomcat

[Henri Gomez]

Just a new thread to discuss about mavenizing Tomcat (OSGI Thread is
allready fully loaded and really interesting).

Costin told us he didn't want to change the current source layout.

Alternative to mavenizing tomcat could be :

- add subdirs (for modules) and pom.xml and hack the source files
filters to get only what's required.

- create a root pom and subdirs/pom.xml, and an ant task to fill a
mavenized targets directories where a standard maven build will be
done.

Any more ideas or advices ?

Regards

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[remm]

On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 22:09 +0200, Henri Gomez wrote:

> Just a new thread to discuss about mavenizing Tomcat (OSGI Thread is
> allready fully loaded and really interesting).
>
> Costin told us he didn't want to change the current source layout.
>
> Alternative to mavenizing tomcat could be :
>
> - add subdirs (for modules) and pom.xml and hack the source files
> filters to get only what's required.
>
> - create a root pom and subdirs/pom.xml, and an ant task to fill a
> mavenized targets directories where a standard maven build will be
> done.
>
> Any more ideas or advices ?

-1 for any change to the build in Tomcat 6.0.

Rémy



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Henri Gomez]

>  -1 for any change to the build in Tomcat 6.0.

Why ?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Yoav Shapira-2]

Hi,

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 4:09 PM, Henri Gomez <henri.gomez@...> wrote:
>  Costin told us he didn't want to change the current source layout.

I agree with Coston on this.  But thankfully Maven is flexible in this
area.  You can define any set of source folders.

>  - add subdirs (for modules) and pom.xml and hack the source files
>  filters to get only what's required.
>
>  - create a root pom and subdirs/pom.xml, and an ant task to fill a
>  mavenized targets directories where a standard maven build will be
>  done.

I like the second idea, simplified further.  One Ant task in the root
build.xml to copy all the required files into a Maven-friendly
temporary directory structure and run the Maven build.  One pom.xml
file to actually do the Maven build in that Maven-friendly temporary
directory layout.

That way the original and current build system, source tree, etc, are
not touched at all.

Yoav

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Costin Manolache-2]

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 1:44 PM, Remy Maucherat <remm@...> wrote:

> On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 22:09 +0200, Henri Gomez wrote:
> > Just a new thread to discuss about mavenizing Tomcat (OSGI Thread is
> > allready fully loaded and really interesting).
> >
> > Costin told us he didn't want to change the current source layout.
> >
> > Alternative to mavenizing tomcat could be :
> >
> > - add subdirs (for modules) and pom.xml and hack the source files
> > filters to get only what's required.
> >
> > - create a root pom and subdirs/pom.xml, and an ant task to fill a
> > mavenized targets directories where a standard maven build will be
> > done.
> >
> > Any more ideas or advices ?
>
> -1 for any change to the build in Tomcat 6.0.
>

I agree with Remy - adding a new directory and any xml/data  inside is
probably fine, but
adding support for Maven ( or Make or any other build tool ) shouldn't
require changes to
the current build - i.e. if you have to change build.xml or move files
around ( for the purpose
of supporting maven or any other tool ) - something is wrong with the tool.



Costin

[Filip Hanik - Dev Lists]

Henri Gomez wrote:
>>  -1 for any change to the build in Tomcat 6.0.
>>    
>
> Why ?
>  
simply because it requires changes, I like to think we work according to
"if it aint broke, don't fix it", and since the maven build doesn't give
us anything the ANT build already does, then there seems to be little
point of it.
I suggest you go back in the archives, the comments you'll see this time
around, will be the same when this issue was brought up last and was
voted down.
In this case remy probably didn't explain his -1, cause it's been
discussed before. normally a -1 must come with a technical
justification, and there were several last time we discussed this.

Filip
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>
>
>
>  


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Yoav Shapira-2]

Filip, this is a fairly rare case where I disagree with you ;)

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 7:18 PM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists
<devlists@...> wrote:
>  simply because it requires changes, I like to think we work according to

It can be done without requiring any changes.

> "if it aint broke, don't fix it", and since the maven build doesn't give us
> anything the ANT build already does, then there seems to be little point of

It's easier.  That's it.

>  I suggest you go back in the archives, the comments you'll see this time
> around, will be the same when this issue was brought up last and was voted

Not true.  I, for one, spoke against it in the past.  Having used
Maven 2 for 2+ years, I now prefer it over Ant.  Moreover, I can
testify that it's saved me and my teams considerable time and resulted
in more consistent and cleaner builds.  I haven't even bothered to
subscribe to users@..., much less dev@..., I've just been
a pure user and it's been cool.

But like I said earlier, it's not worth disrupting the current Tomcat
build or source layout.  Only if it can be done without requiring any
changes, which it can.

Yoav

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[remm]

On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 21:03 -0400, Yoav Shapira wrote:
> But like I said earlier, it's not worth disrupting the current Tomcat
> build or source layout.  Only if it can be done without requiring any
> changes, which it can.

I will still vote against any inclusion of Maven usage in TC 6.0, 5.5
and 4.1 (and for these branches only).

The current build scripts are fully tested and work well. Adding
additional methods of building or replacing these scripts altogether
would only provide ways to create and/or release broken binaries.

Rémy



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Yoav Shapira-2]

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:09 PM, Remy Maucherat <remm@...> wrote:
>  The current build scripts are fully tested and work well. Adding
>  additional methods of building or replacing these scripts altogether
>  would only provide ways to create and/or release broken binaries.

Again, no one is saying anything about touching the current build
scripts, build process, release process, or source structure.  All
those remain the same.  The job of the release manager remains the
same.

This is just an alternative for those people who want to use a
slightly easier / user-friendlier build system.  We could do worse
than lowering the barrier to entry for new contributors.

Yoav

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Henri Gomez]

>  This is just an alternative for those people who want to use a
>  slightly easier / user-friendlier build system.  We could do worse
>  than lowering the barrier to entry for new contributors.

The idea is to :

- keep the current source layout

- keep the build.xml

- add some subdirs with pom.xml

- add a pom.xml to the base, where an ant task will grab sources,
subdirs/pom.xml and assemble them in an alternative location before
building.

it's tricky and unusual in a maven world, but it will help maven users
to have quickly a running Tomcat from scratch.

No revolution here, not even evolution, just an alternative :)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Filip Hanik - Dev Lists]

Yoav Shapira wrote:

> Filip, this is a fairly rare case where I disagree with you ;)
>
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 7:18 PM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists
> <devlists@...> wrote:
>  
>>  simply because it requires changes, I like to think we work according to
>>    
>
> It can be done without requiring any changes.
>
>  
>> "if it aint broke, don't fix it", and since the maven build doesn't give us
>> anything the ANT build already does, then there seems to be little point of
>>    
>
> It's easier.  That's it.
>
>  
>>  I suggest you go back in the archives, the comments you'll see this time
>> around, will be the same when this issue was brought up last and was voted
>>    
>
> Not true.  I, for one, spoke against it in the past.  Having used
> Maven 2 for 2+ years, I now prefer it over Ant.  Moreover, I can
> testify that it's saved me and my teams considerable time and resulted
> in more consistent and cleaner builds.  I haven't even bothered to
> subscribe to users@..., much less dev@..., I've just been
> a pure user and it's been cool.
>
> But like I said earlier, it's not worth disrupting the current Tomcat
> build or source layout.  Only if it can be done without requiring any
> changes, which it can.
>  

correct, and if it doesn't add any value add, which is what the
discussion was before,
then it seems like just one more set of build scripts to maintain.

Filip
> Yoav
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>
>
>
>  


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[remm]

On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 22:28 -0400, Yoav Shapira wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:09 PM, Remy Maucherat <remm@...> wrote:
> >  The current build scripts are fully tested and work well. Adding
> >  additional methods of building or replacing these scripts altogether
> >  would only provide ways to create and/or release broken binaries.
>
> Again, no one is saying anything about touching the current build
> scripts, build process, release process, or source structure.  All
> those remain the same.  The job of the release manager remains the
> same.
>
> This is just an alternative for those people who want to use a
> slightly easier / user-friendlier build system.  We could do worse
> than lowering the barrier to entry for new contributors.

You mean you type "mvn" instead of "ant" ? I agree te keys are closer
together on my keyboard, so it could indeed be easier. Personally, I did
have a first hand experience with Maven, and I think it's horrible (you
have no clue what it is doing, error reporting is bad, and basically,
you have to think and act the tool's way).

I disagree with having two separate build systems, there's no guarantee
of equivalence.

Rémy



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Costin Manolache-2]

We already have eclipse files checked in AFAIK - that counts as the second
build system.
We used to have makefiles too, also in parallel with  ant (in 3.0 times).

The goal IMO is that people who like to type mvn can do it - without any
guarantee that
the result will be identical with the official release or will be maintained
long term, just like
the eclipse project can run but it's quite different from the official
build.

If it's making easier for some people to build tomcat - and it doesn't
affect people who use
ant in any way - what's the harm ?

Costin


On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 2:23 AM, Remy Maucherat <remm@...> wrote:

> On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 22:28 -0400, Yoav Shapira wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:09 PM, Remy Maucherat <remm@...>
> wrote:
> > >  The current build scripts are fully tested and work well. Adding
> > >  additional methods of building or replacing these scripts altogether
> > >  would only provide ways to create and/or release broken binaries.
> >
> > Again, no one is saying anything about touching the current build
> > scripts, build process, release process, or source structure.  All
> > those remain the same.  The job of the release manager remains the
> > same.
> >
> > This is just an alternative for those people who want to use a
> > slightly easier / user-friendlier build system.  We could do worse
> > than lowering the barrier to entry for new contributors.
>
> You mean you type "mvn" instead of "ant" ? I agree te keys are closer
> together on my keyboard, so it could indeed be easier. Personally, I did
> have a first hand experience with Maven, and I think it's horrible (you
> have no clue what it is doing, error reporting is bad, and basically,
> you have to think and act the tool's way).
>
> I disagree with having two separate build systems, there's no guarantee
> of equivalence.
>
> Rémy
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>
>

[Filip Hanik - Dev Lists]

Costin Manolache wrote:
> We already have eclipse files checked in AFAIK - that counts as the second
> build system.
> We used to have makefiles too, also in parallel with  ant (in 3.0 times).
>
> The goal IMO is that people who like to type mvn can do it - without any
> guarantee that
> the result will be identical with the official release or will be maintained
> long term, just like
>  
isn't that the culprit, including a feature under the pretenses that it
wont be maintained?

Filip

> the eclipse project can run but it's quite different from the official
> build.
>
> If it's making easier for some people to build tomcat - and it doesn't
> affect people who use
> ant in any way - what's the harm ?
>
> Costin
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 2:23 AM, Remy Maucherat <remm@...> wrote:
>
>  
>> On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 22:28 -0400, Yoav Shapira wrote:
>>    
>>> On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:09 PM, Remy Maucherat <remm@...>
>>>      
>> wrote:
>>    
>>>>  The current build scripts are fully tested and work well. Adding
>>>>  additional methods of building or replacing these scripts altogether
>>>>  would only provide ways to create and/or release broken binaries.
>>>>        
>>> Again, no one is saying anything about touching the current build
>>> scripts, build process, release process, or source structure.  All
>>> those remain the same.  The job of the release manager remains the
>>> same.
>>>
>>> This is just an alternative for those people who want to use a
>>> slightly easier / user-friendlier build system.  We could do worse
>>> than lowering the barrier to entry for new contributors.
>>>      
>> You mean you type "mvn" instead of "ant" ? I agree te keys are closer
>> together on my keyboard, so it could indeed be easier. Personally, I did
>> have a first hand experience with Maven, and I think it's horrible (you
>> have no clue what it is doing, error reporting is bad, and basically,
>> you have to think and act the tool's way).
>>
>> I disagree with having two separate build systems, there's no guarantee
>> of equivalence.
>>
>> Rémy
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>>
>>
>>    
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG.
>> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.6/1404 - Release Date: 4/29/2008 6:27 PM
>>    

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Costin Manolache-2]

On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists <
devlists@...> wrote:

> Costin Manolache wrote:
>
> > We already have eclipse files checked in AFAIK - that counts as the
> > second
> > build system.
> > We used to have makefiles too, also in parallel with  ant (in 3.0
> > times).
> >
> > The goal IMO is that people who like to type mvn can do it - without any
> > guarantee that
> > the result will be identical with the official release or will be
> > maintained
> > long term, just like
> >
> >
> isn't that the culprit, including a feature under the pretenses that it
> wont be maintained?

I meant 'maintained' in the apache-sense, of having 3 +1, etc. ( which AFAIK
is required  for
something to be 'officially' released ).

I'm sure Henri will maintain it  - and at some point it may even have the 3
+1s. As long as there is
no technical reason for a veto ( besides the 'don't break existing build' -
which I think he addressed ),
I don't see how to stop him.  I don't like Maven  -  but  I think  as long
as it  doesn't break anything
Henri is perfectly entitled to work on this.


Costin

>
> Filip
>
>  the eclipse project can run but it's quite different from the official
> > build.
> >
> > If it's making easier for some people to build tomcat - and it doesn't
> > affect people who use
> > ant in any way - what's the harm ?
> >
> > Costin
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 2:23 AM, Remy Maucherat <remm@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 22:28 -0400, Yoav Shapira wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:09 PM, Remy Maucherat <remm@...>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > >  The current build scripts are fully tested and work well. Adding
> > > > >  additional methods of building or replacing these scripts
> > > > > altogether
> > > > >  would only provide ways to create and/or release broken binaries.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > Again, no one is saying anything about touching the current build
> > > > scripts, build process, release process, or source structure.  All
> > > > those remain the same.  The job of the release manager remains the
> > > > same.
> > > >
> > > > This is just an alternative for those people who want to use a
> > > > slightly easier / user-friendlier build system.  We could do worse
> > > > than lowering the barrier to entry for new contributors.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > You mean you type "mvn" instead of "ant" ? I agree te keys are closer
> > > together on my keyboard, so it could indeed be easier. Personally, I
> > > did
> > > have a first hand experience with Maven, and I think it's horrible
> > > (you
> > > have no clue what it is doing, error reporting is bad, and basically,
> > > you have to think and act the tool's way).
> > >
> > > I disagree with having two separate build systems, there's no
> > > guarantee
> > > of equivalence.
> > >
> > > Rémy
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > > Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.6/1404 -
> > > Release Date: 4/29/2008 6:27 PM
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>
>

[Filip Hanik - Dev Lists]

Costin Manolache wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists <
> devlists@...> wrote:
>
>  
>> Costin Manolache wrote:
>>
>>    
>>> We already have eclipse files checked in AFAIK - that counts as the
>>> second
>>> build system.
>>> We used to have makefiles too, also in parallel with  ant (in 3.0
>>> times).
>>>
>>> The goal IMO is that people who like to type mvn can do it - without any
>>> guarantee that
>>> the result will be identical with the official release or will be
>>> maintained
>>> long term, just like
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>> isn't that the culprit, including a feature under the pretenses that it
>> wont be maintained?
>>    
>
>
> I meant 'maintained' in the apache-sense, of having 3 +1, etc. ( which AFAIK
> is required  for
> something to be 'officially' released ).
>
> I'm sure Henri will maintain it  - and at some point it may even have the 3
> +1s. As long as there is
> no technical reason for a veto ( besides the 'don't break existing build' -
> which I think he addressed ),
> I don't see how to stop him.  I don't like Maven  -  but  I think  as long
> as it  doesn't break anything
> Henri is perfectly entitled to work on this.
>  

absolutely correct, and it should follow the guidelines of voting just
like everything else
1+ means I support and intend to help
if you just support it, but are not planning on doing the work, then the
vote is +0 :)

Henri is more than welcome to make the proposal, no one is stopping him
from doing so.

Filip

>
> Costin
>
>
>  
>> Filip
>>
>>  the eclipse project can run but it's quite different from the official
>>    
>>> build.
>>>
>>> If it's making easier for some people to build tomcat - and it doesn't
>>> affect people who use
>>> ant in any way - what's the harm ?
>>>
>>> Costin
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 2:23 AM, Remy Maucherat <remm@...> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>> On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 22:28 -0400, Yoav Shapira wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:09 PM, Remy Maucherat <remm@...>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>>  The current build scripts are fully tested and work well. Adding
>>>>>          
>>>>>>  additional methods of building or replacing these scripts
>>>>>> altogether
>>>>>>  would only provide ways to create and/or release broken binaries.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>> Again, no one is saying anything about touching the current build
>>>>> scripts, build process, release process, or source structure.  All
>>>>> those remain the same.  The job of the release manager remains the
>>>>> same.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is just an alternative for those people who want to use a
>>>>> slightly easier / user-friendlier build system.  We could do worse
>>>>> than lowering the barrier to entry for new contributors.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>> You mean you type "mvn" instead of "ant" ? I agree te keys are closer
>>>> together on my keyboard, so it could indeed be easier. Personally, I
>>>> did
>>>> have a first hand experience with Maven, and I think it's horrible
>>>> (you
>>>> have no clue what it is doing, error reporting is bad, and basically,
>>>> you have to think and act the tool's way).
>>>>
>>>> I disagree with having two separate build systems, there's no
>>>> guarantee
>>>> of equivalence.
>>>>
>>>> Rémy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>> Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.6/1404 -
>>>> Release Date: 4/29/2008 6:27 PM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>>
>>
>>    

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...