FAQ

On Apr 11, 2011, at 10:01 AM, amaniatis@apache.org wrote:

+ <relativePath>../../pom.xml</relativePath>
Do we really need these?

Andrus

Search Discussions

  • Aristedes Maniatis at Apr 11, 2011 at 7:06 am

    On 11/04/11 5:03 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
    Do we really need these?
    How else will maven find the parent from the child pom? Without it, maven3 does not find any of the version numbers of any dependency. These make about 500 warnings go away and ensure that dependency versioning is only in the main parent pom.

    A better solution would be to create proper inheritance where the 'middle' level poms (like the one in /framework/pom.xml) are part of the inheritance tree. That is the standard maven way. But I remember that you didn't like that for a reason I can't remember.

    Ari


    --
    -------------------------->
    Aristedes Maniatis
    GPG fingerprint CBFB 84B4 738D 4E87 5E5C 5EFA EF6A 7D2E 3E49 102A
  • Andrus Adamchik at Apr 11, 2011 at 7:16 am
    It did find the version till now. But I guess that was Maven 2.

    Also I hope that doesn't affect behavior of the released versions of the artifacts imported by other projects.
    But I remember that you didn't like that for a reason I can't remember.
    The reason was that the end user apps need to import a bunch of garbage along the parent pom dependency chain. Now it is just a single parent POM. I still wish we could produce self contained cayenne-server and cayenne-client artifacts.

    Andrus
    On Apr 11, 2011, at 10:06 AM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:
    On 11/04/11 5:03 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
    Do we really need these?
    How else will maven find the parent from the child pom? Without it, maven3 does not find any of the version numbers of any dependency. These make about 500 warnings go away and ensure that dependency versioning is only in the main parent pom.

    A better solution would be to create proper inheritance where the 'middle' level poms (like the one in /framework/pom.xml) are part of the inheritance tree. That is the standard maven way. But I remember that you didn't like that for a reason I can't remember.

    Ari


    --
    -------------------------->
    Aristedes Maniatis
    GPG fingerprint CBFB 84B4 738D 4E87 5E5C 5EFA EF6A 7D2E 3E49 102A
  • Aristedes Maniatis at Apr 11, 2011 at 7:20 am

    On 11/04/11 5:15 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
    It did find the version till now. But I guess that was Maven 2.
    Maven 2 just complains less.

    Also I hope that doesn't affect behavior of the released versions of the artifacts imported by other projects.
    I'm not changing the dependencies, only how maven can find them when you build. Now it finds them in the source and we don't need to install before building.
    But I remember that you didn't like that for a reason I can't remember.
    The reason was that the end user apps need to import a bunch of garbage along the parent pom dependency chain. Now it is just a single parent POM. I still wish we could produce self contained cayenne-server and cayenne-client artifacts.

    Just another pom, no other jars, so the garbage is limited. But since every maven project has the same parent/child thing going on, I don't think people will care much.


    Ari


    --
    -------------------------->
    Aristedes Maniatis
    GPG fingerprint CBFB 84B4 738D 4E87 5E5C 5EFA EF6A 7D2E 3E49 102A
  • Andrus Adamchik at Apr 11, 2011 at 7:36 am

    On Apr 11, 2011, at 10:20 AM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:

    But I remember that you didn't like that for a reason I can't remember.
    The reason was that the end user apps need to import a bunch of garbage along the parent pom dependency chain. Now it is just a single parent POM. I still wish we could produce self contained cayenne-server and cayenne-client artifacts.

    Just another pom, no other jars, so the garbage is limited. But since every maven project has the same parent/child thing going on, I don't think people will care much.
    Yeah, maybe I should get over the idea that we can produce self-contained artifacts. Even aggregated jars is already a hack from Maven standpoint, but sadly Maven has no separation of the internal and external view of the project code. I am having hard time accepting this.

    So maybe we'll think of another module refactoring... Move cayenne-server and cayenne-client up a level (also cayenne-tools, lifecycle, project), and then implement clean hierarchical poms. Will need to think about it.

    Andrus
  • Aristedes Maniatis at Apr 11, 2011 at 7:44 am

    On 11/04/11 5:36 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
    So maybe we'll think of another module refactoring... Move cayenne-server and cayenne-client up a level (also cayenne-tools, lifecycle, project), and then implement clean hierarchical poms. Will need to think about it.
    I think that is a good idea. But maybe not cayenne-project?

    As long as the artifact ids don't change, no one will ever notice.

    Ari


    --
    -------------------------->
    Aristedes Maniatis
    GPG fingerprint CBFB 84B4 738D 4E87 5E5C 5EFA EF6A 7D2E 3E49 102A
  • Andrus Adamchik at Apr 11, 2011 at 7:47 am

    On Apr 11, 2011, at 10:44 AM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:

    But maybe not cayenne-project?
    That one was going to be promoted from "unpublised" to "published" per CAY-1555, that's why I thought of it as top level.

    Andrus

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupdev @
categoriescayenne
postedApr 11, '11 at 7:03a
activeApr 11, '11 at 7:47a
posts7
users2
websitecayenne.apache.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase