Re: [cdt-dev] Building with Maven

["Schaefer, Doug" <Doug.Schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

To summarize my point in this discussion. The reason we went to Maven is so that everyone can build for themselves anywhere. Almost every vendor has patches they apply to CDT before releasing it downstream. Having a build system that can run anywhere is a key requirement that the previous releng scripts didn't allow (they were very tied to being run on build.eclipse.org).

We have properties that allow you to point at alternative locations for the Eclipse Platform and TM dependencies. You should have what you need. If not, please propose changes.

Doug.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Schaefer, Doug
> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 10:17 AM
> To: Vladimir Prus; cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Building with Maven
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Vladimir Prus [mailto:vladimir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 7:53 AM
> > To: Schaefer, Doug; cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Building with Maven
> >
> > On Wednesday, September 28, 2011 20:56:41 Schaefer, Doug wrote:
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Vladimir Prus [mailto:vladimir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 12:25 PM
> > > > To: Schaefer, Doug; cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Building with Maven
> > > >
> > > > On Wednesday, September 28, 2011 18:55:36 Schaefer, Doug wrote:
> > > > > Reproducibility of maven builds is a hot topic in the community
> > > > > right now. Freezing .m2 is a common approach that's being proposed.
> > > >
> > > > Oh, so there's no official approach right now? Ehm.
> > >
> > > No. There's never been anything really official about Eclipse releng
> > > to begin with. Vendors who redistribute Eclipse generally deal with
> > > these requirements in their own way. And given the promise of API
> > > stability, I'm not sure how large of an affect we're talking about here.
> >
> > I kinda understand that with limited resources, pushing releng onto
> > vendors might be reasonable, but this is obviously not a good idea in
> > general, so I'm worried that you seem to think it's OK.
> 
> Worry if you need. Contribute if you have a vested interest in it.
> 
> > > > > Another option is to create a local mirror of the dependencies
> > > > > for CDT and set the properties listed in the top level pom.xml
> > > > > file to point at them instead of the default. It's pretty easy
> > > > > to create
> > > > > p2 mirrors these days (google for it). And use -D on the mvn
> > > > > command line to override the properties.
> > > >
> > > > I imagine this will work, but having maven "download" things from
> > > > file:// repository sounds like a way to slow down already slow
> > > > down build :-(
> > >
> > > Not sure I get you. file:// should be pretty fast since it doesn't
> > > go over a network connection.
> >
> > Unless file:// is actually an NFS share.
> 
> My point is that it shouldn't be noticeably slower than straight file access.
> Unless you have evidence to the contrary.
> 
> > > And I'm not sure I'd characterize the builds as slow. Including
> > > running all the tests, the builds only take 40 minutes on Hudson.
> >
> > That counts as slow in my book. In our current environment, building
> > CDT takes a few minutes (without tests), which is important for
> productivity.
> 
> I hope you're team isn't doing releng builds on a regular basis. If they are,
> then you apparently do have a vested interest in contributing to make things
> better.
> 
> > - Volodya
> >
> > --
> > Vladimir Prus
> > CodeSourcery / Mentor Graphics
> > +7 (812) 677-68-40
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev