[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [egit-dev] How to build [EJ]Git?
|
Alex Blewitt wrote:
On Jan 6, 2010, at 15:51, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
Alex Blewitt <alex.blewitt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
So, we've got EGit which builds manifest-first, and JGit which builds
pom-first?
Yes. And as Jason said, it makes more sense than any other
configuration we could come up with right now.
On Jan 6, 2010, at 14:48, Jason van Zyl wrote:
...which probably makes the most sense because JGit as an artifact is
consumed by other projects.
Yup, exactly.
I suspect in the Eclipse world, it's only EGit that will consume JGit.
Sure, in Eclipse based projects which load into the Eclipse
workbench, that's probably true right now.
But its not true in the larger sense of the world. JGit is a very
critical component of Gerrit Code Review, the latter doesn't exist
without the former. Gerrit's build system is pom-first Maven 2.
It can't consume a manifest-first Maven 3 based build artifact.
So, this is the nub of the problem, right? Not that we've got a split of
vesions (Maven 1 vs Maven 2) but the fact that Maven 2 can't consume a
Maven-3 built artifact.
Why not? Maven 2 can consume a heck of a lot of Jars that aren't written
by, for, or with Maven. If we use Maven 3 to build
JGit-0.6.0-20100105.jar, then why can't Maven 2 suck that in as a binary
and put it on the classpath? Granted, you won't then have a system which
can build both Gerrit and JGit in the same space, but how will Maven 3
succeed if all of its built artefacts are incompatible with Maven 2? I
don't seem to recall the same being the case with the 1->2 upgrade.
Alex
This particular problem was an oversight on my part, actually. I should
have put tycho specific stuff into a profile and this would make
deployed artifacts consumable by both maven 2 and maven 3... Having said
that, I still think pom-first makes more sense for JGit, given it's
dependencies and how it's being consumed at the moment.
--
Regards,
Igor
